Just teach my kid the math

> having universal algorithms for solving problems and describing the universe is really what math is more about.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. What universal algorithms are there currently for solving problems and describing the universe? And why are these universal algorithms more important than estimation skill in practice?

Are you suggesting that there's always only one true way to do things in math, and that the quest for the one true way is the only noble pursuit?

FWIW, to me that sentence somewhat reads like a pre-conceived idea about math that could possibly impede your appreciation for valid alternative approaches.

It's worth considering that in computing, the algorithms that have been used for math in processors and standard libraries have been changing dramatically ever since the first transistor. And it's not because the newer algorithms are more universal, it's often because we're simply making different tradeoffs over time. Sometimes it's because better algorithms are being invented, because the algorithms we thought were great turn out to be not universal. Sometimes it's because a new fast approximation formula is discovered that is accurate to the precision of the machine.

There's very little in computing today that is "universal", despite the pedagogical emphasis on this abstract idea. There are, however, lots of algorithms that are canonized. Math constructs that seem universal because everyone knows them and they're popular, and alternatives aren't well known, enough that it becomes hard to imagine the alternatives.

> My kids are entirely missing that in their common core education...

Are you absolutely certain that's true? Common core, as the author pointed out, is still required to teach the old algorithms. Are you sure you're not having an emotional reaction to not quite understanding why some of the new methods are there and/or being unfamiliar with them? Your reaction here is exactly what this entire post was addressing.

> The 21st-century is not looking for humans who serve as calculating machines, but instead it seeks problem-solvers and innovative thinkers.

I distinctly recall how one of my grade school teachers justified learning maths: "In the future, you aren't going to be walking around with calculators in your pocket!" Yet today I routinely check even simple calculations with the calculator in my pocket.

I've found that error-checking is the key to doing 'well' in maths, yet that's something humans are bad at and something machines are great at. Given this, I'd love to see a future where learning to do math strongly emphasized learning how to best leverage computers for error-checking. That's a skill I wish I had developed earlier...

Part of the problem with this is that I feel elementary school teachers often lack understanding of why the math works. I remember hearing horror stories of people taking the Praxis and all the elementary teachers freaking out about the math -- one even said she had failed that section three times! It doesn't bode well that these are the people teaching our kids how basic math works. And it does show when they get to secondary schools.

Exactly! I'm not in an inner-city area, but a rural one and there's a lot of the same problems. The poverty level of the county I teach in is 20%, and a lot of the students have to go home, and often get no support at home. And it's a clear night and day between the ones who do get support and encouragement and those who don't.

Sadly, the biggest issue I see is that they want school to be, basically, training for a job and real life. So, since you'll never solve a system of equation on a job (or so they believe), they don't see why it should be taught. But, yeah, that's not getting into accountability issues with students and their families. It's a frustrating cycle, and is likely going to push me from teaching before too much longer.

its my understanding that common core math is of the theology that its more important to learn how to think than to solve the question.

its also important to understand that if a kid uses 'the old way' to solve a question, they do not get points for it. remember, this is coming from an ideology that being taught how to think is priority number one, and priority number two is to not deviate from that thinking.

it was always frustrating in hs, especially calculus when I would get 0 points for questions i had right because i used a shortcut, trick, or simply solved it more efficiently. then I got to college and the professor encouraged that. on the first major exam I scored a 96, far above anyone else, and the professor asked to shake my hand, because no one ever solved equations so efficiently before.

i attack and do problems differently, sometimes out of necessity. dyslexia is an adversary of mine, and i find it better not to fight it on its home ground. i also read slow, and take much longer to absorb a problem into my head than other people. but once i do, i own it. unless people make me do it their way in the process. its like running 100m hurdles with 30 hurdles.

im sure you love how you solve problems. you can do it fine your way, i cant. once you start forcing everyone to think one way and evaluating them, your measuring each animal how well they climb a tree.