I'm the only one who hates quora.com?
Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
231–240 of 684 posts
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the opposite of what I've seen in California. There used to be a big focus on tracking, gifted programs and "accelerated math", but it is now perceived as inequitable. Gifted programs were cancelled, tracks eliminated, and accelerated math discouraged (you can skip a year if you study outside school, but it is discouraged). The focus is getting everyone to some minimal level, and no attention on the high perfo…
I don’t see the issue. The internet exists now and you can access a world of content in seconds. I didn’t get any of this, ever in my mediocre education - I don’t see why so much focus should be placed on these elites at the expense of everyone else.
The internet you use to access content in seconds was created by those elites.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#233Because Spartaaaaa.
But honestly, I always thought it is because whoever wrote them didn’t care to make them easier as they were not competing for the student.
But yep, they are total hardcore.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#234For that matter, look at say a 4th or 5th grade English textbook from the U.S. pre-1970 compared to even High School book today.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#235In my high school year in international school(in germany) I've seen many students from diverse backgrounds. I could see balanced number of students taught from their own origin: US, asian or international school itself. One thing I remember until now is that students from US kept using the phrase 'plug-it-in' whenever they substitute values into quadratic formula. Overusing that term made me laugh about their attitu…
"Plug-it-in" is simply jargon for what would more properly be called substitution and reduction. One would use the exact same sort of reasoning when doing "proper" math proofs, so I think your attitude might be a bit misguided - there's no "magic" involved.
yes but I've already seen the attitude among american students who treat plug-it-in equivalent to plug-in devices xD
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#236I can only assume but culture makes things very different. I often said that French abstract algebra books stopped me from learning for 10 years (after many serious attempts). One book from Garreth Williams unlocked 80% of my issues. The shocking part was the approach. It was very operational, you calculate, you manipulate concrete data. In French books it's all theorems and concepts. Learning curve to make a Haskell…
I feel like it's worth pointing out here, for Americans who don't know better (no blame implied), that the French have one of the best mathematical pipelines in the world. They have almost as many Nobels (13 vs. 11) despite having 1/5 the population. Guardian article about them here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/31/europa-french-... So please don't think France is a backwater that just doesn't know how…
> I feel like it's worth pointing out here, for Americans who don't know better (no blame implied), that the French have one of the best mathematical pipelines in the world. They have almost as many Nobels (13 vs. 11) despite having 1/5 the population.
I’d much rather measure an educational system by how much it teaches the average person, than by how many Nobel prize winners it produces.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. By that argument, one could just as easily label top universities with high scholastic admissions requirements to be “inequitable”, and thus unacceptable. Equal opportunity does not imply equal outcome—even for a perfectly fair school. Quite the opposite! In fact, I’m glad I got rejected from several schools... their high bar helped guide me to something that worked better for me anyway.
I think people do say that. The notion is that when you look at the people attending Harvard and Mit, for instance, their parents tend to be much more wealthy than the students at Bunker Hill Community College. You're right! That isn't an excuse to shut them down but it might be a reason to think of the system a inequitable. It may be that similar parallels exist in K-12. Then if you're middle class or poor, you have…
> That may be short term thinking or kind of defeatist but it is reasonable.
I think this is exactly the wrong thinking about taxes. And it's abused by pundits and politicians by making people spend the same money many times in their head. I mean, you can't be simultaneously outraged that "your tax money" supports elite schools and abortion clinics and the military; you don't pay that much of a tax. In fact, an average taxpayer's contribution would amount to buying some office supplies for one, small government building.
Money is fungible, and by the time enough is collected to fund a school, there's no "my money" in there anymore, much like if you take a fistful of sand from your yard and throw it on a beach nearby, there is no more "your sand".
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#238I was comparing my math books (from Soviet university, Physics and Applied Math) and my son's from Canadian university (CS). Huge difference to be honest. Canadian ones (same as in US I think) were more like belletristic texts written with the goal to give basics without too much thought needed by the reader. In contrast you cannot approach Soviet text math book without serious thinking effort. You need to overcome s…
Read, then reread, and still do not understand your point. Are you saying that in Russia, since the education was free that the goal of the textbooks was to make it hard to want to stay in school, if so, to me, seems like it’s unlikely, but possible. Putting aside non-Russian textbooks, what are you saying the intended reasoning of the textbook form was as it relates to Russian culture?
I don't think the books were made hard intentionally.
From what I understand, in the US, the same course on, say, Introduction to Calculus, can be attended by people who are learning to be MDs, chemical engineers, accountants and mathematicians because there is no fixed curriculum and everyone can pick up that course. So the textbooks and courses need to be as accessible as possible to accommodate a wide range of aptitudes.
In Russia/USSR, at least till 90s (don't know if it's still true since there had been a movement to "westernize" education) you enrolled into a major, not a school, and the whole class had the same curriculum for the first two years with some specialization starting on the third year (the whole program is 5-6 years). So students with the same major go to the same courses, which are not shared with any other majors. In this system Introduction to Calculus for mathematicians will be very different from the course with the same name for sociologists and does not have to be as accessible for people who do not really care about strictness of proofs, structure and other "mathy" stuff.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, 2 is prime, and so is 57, so it makes sense those would be math focused schools. ;) [0] —- [0]: https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/6358/story-of-grothe...
> And indeed 57 looks a bit prime for some psychological reason It tricked me, until I read the link.
No one taught me this in school, but if you add up the digits (5+7=12) and the result is divisible by 3, then so is the original number. It works recursively.
Re: Why are Soviet math textbooks so hardcore in comparison to US textbooks? (2017)
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t see the issue. The internet exists now and you can access a world of content in seconds. I didn’t get any of this, ever in my mediocre education - I don’t see why so much focus should be placed on these elites at the expense of everyone else.
> I don’t see why so much focus should be placed on these elites at the expense of everyone else. Because the big breakthroughs and innovations in math and science are achieved by the elites and not by the mediocre masses. This doesn't mean that we should neglect the mediocre masses (I'm one of them, by the way), they do good, important work. But they're are not sufficient.
Who is permitted the time and resources to develop breakthroughs and innovations?
Surely not the proletariat in modern America, where the vast majority are getting poorer year by year.