An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California • Hacker News Board

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#61

Post by nafix » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #48

daveslash wrote: post #10

Sorry for being out of the loop and asking a (possibly) dumb question: What is the stated reason that the CMF suggested these changes? Is it about budgets? Is it because some people might think these classes " aren't that important? ". The open letter seems to suggest that it's about closing gaps between privileged and less privileged - is that it? Honest question - I'm not trying to stir the pot.

I believe the gist of the argument is that when you split students into 'normal' and 'advanced' classes at a young age, the students who are not put into the advanced classes will believe they are just naturally not good at math and will give up on trying to get better because they will think they just "don't have a math brain". Here is a short blurb about the idea: > The framework would not forbid districts from acc…

Sounds like more woke nonsense. Sounds nice and easy to a layman from a super high level but not practical or put through any kind of rigorous rational thought.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#62

Post by watwut » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

brummm wrote: post #22

sefrost wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which countries do that and which countries don't?

Germany splits students into different schools starting 5th grade and it's absolutely great.

It is genuinly too soon.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#63

Post by chadash » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

frostburg wrote: post #45

chadash wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre-K (4 year olds) seems a bit young for teaching multiplication tables.

They do not require abstraction, I don't know if it is necessary but it is practical to teach them.

What's the point of teaching kids to memorize something that they can't apply? When I was a kid, schools taught multiplication tables in 2nd grade, when most kids are 7 years old. The difference in cognition between a 4 year old and 7 year old is insane.

I'd be surprised if there were any countries where multiplication was formally taught to pre-K students as part of the standard curriculum, but i'd love to be proven wrong.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#64

Post by wbsss4412 » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #14

lr4444lr wrote: post #3

Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…

Is the curriculum being watered down? My reading on this the last time it came up on HN is that the sequencing of math topics is being changed, which results in classes not having the familiar names like Algebra 2, Geometry, AB Calculus, etc. That doesn’t mean the concepts will not be covered by the end. I remember the huge blowups over “Common Core” years ago, which included new ways of teaching math concepts. I got…

As someone with a math background I found the blow ups over common core to be ridiculous. Focusing on parents unfamiliarity in place of any actual discussion of effectiveness.

If we are going to get anywhere with math education, it can’t be based on pandering to parent’s expectations.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#65

Post by legalcorrection » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

daveslash wrote: post #10

Sorry for being out of the loop and asking a (possibly) dumb question: What is the stated reason that the CMF suggested these changes? Is it about budgets? Is it because some people might think these classes " aren't that important? ". The open letter seems to suggest that it's about closing gaps between privileged and less privileged - is that it? Honest question - I'm not trying to stir the pot.

No post body was provided.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#66

Post by JaimeThompson » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #53

> as is suggested on lines 1226-1239 of Chapter 5 of the California Math Framework It's a MS Word document. How am I supposed to find lines 1226-1239? They might want to actually quote it.

Here you go. Multiple methods listed but in short it's under Home / Find / Goto then select the line option.

https://www.groovypost.com/howto/quickly-go-to-a-certain-pag...

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#67

Post by AlanYx » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

dc-programmer wrote: post #15

lr4444lr wrote: post #3

Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…

I think America is going to have to take a hard look at its math education if it’s serious about re-industrializing. Where are all the extra engineers going to come from? I think you are touching on theory I have that Americans are becoming increasingly resentful that technical skills are becoming more necessary for middle class living. This is a huge driver of the pervading sense of precariousness. For some reason t…

These things go in cycles. A lot of people don't realize that Scopes actually lost the Scopes Monkey Trial, and that the tide didn't turn overwhelmingly to rationalism in public education until the 1958 National Defense Education Act (which was motivated by the idea that there was a risk of the nation falling behind scientifically). The tide will turn towards rationalism and rigor again, eventually.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#68

Post by TulliusCicero » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:32 PM UTC

morelisp wrote: post #33

sefrost wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which countries do that and which countries don't?

In Germany you can be sorted into a Hauptschule around age 10. At this point you will definitely not get a university education via any usual path. Increasingly even "the trades" are closed off to graduates and people expect a Realschule (HS/GED equivalent) degree for those. I don't think university is appropriate for everyone and I dearly wish skilled trades had a higher position in society, and generally don't beli…

I don't think either system is great right now. From an American perspective, I really wish that there were still trade-type classes in high school, and those were more accepted as a viable career path at that stage of life for those who want it.

One path could be partnerships with local community/technical colleges. My high school participated in a program called "Middle College" where high school students took classes at a local community college (can't remember if it was all or just some) and that seemed to work well.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#69

Post by falcolas » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:33 PM UTC

acchow wrote: post #18

lr4444lr wrote: post #3

Efforts like this are well meaning, but only treat symptoms. The major impetus for watered down curricula is the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Schools are not prepared to hold back massive numbers of kids, drop out proclivity for students held back rises, and teachers will be poorly evaluated by virtue of their students…

> the very rational fear that large swaths of the student population will fail if expected to perform at the prior standards of rigor. Why is this a rational fear? It seems shocking to me that students can't perform at the same prior standards given their parents are more educated than the prior generation's parents.

Potential reason it's rational: The shoulders of those giants are higher than ever before. Climbing to those heights is correspondingly harder to do.

Speaking for myself, I had to worry very little about computers until late in high school (Senior year, specifically). There were no spreadsheet or word processing classes, and the typing classes were only for the girls. There was Algebra (up through Calculus as an optional course), but many others that my niece has that I didn't.

Re: An update on the campaign to defend serious math education in California

#70

Post by whymauri » Tue, Apr 26, 2022, 6:33 PM UTC

2sk21 wrote: post #49

jl6 wrote: post #43

Which states are doing it right?

In New Jersey and Massachusetts at least, there is absolutely no move to water down the math curriculum in any way. On the contrary, the schools here compete on how many AP courses are offered.

When I moved to MA, it blew my mind when I learned that what Florida considers an 'advanced' or even 'specialized' education is literally the baseline education in Boston and the suburbs. The best schools in Miami Dade County would be median in Middlesex.