Live data from Hacker News

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

scottaaronson.blog

371–380 of 657 posts

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

#371
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like more woke nonsense You are right that this is a lot of nonsense. Specifically, 'you aren't good at math/math is hard' is the nonsense meme that gets hammered into student heads so frequently during school that most of them actually start to believe it. It's not some kind of novel woke nonsense, though, it's how math instruction on this continent has been happening over the past X decades. The wokies are…

>You are right that this is a lot of nonsense. Specifically, 'you aren't good at math/math is hard' is the nonsense meme that gets hammered into student heads so frequently during school that most of them actually start to believe it. No, the nonsense is the idea that we are all cut out for math. That's the fundamental underpinning behind the "wokies" push for equity, a silent conflation of equality of opportunity wi…

Can't we agree that both extremes are wrong? While I agree that it is wrong to assume there is no such thing as innate human ability, and it is wrong to assume everyone can achieve equally, you seem to be arguing the opposite; that there is nothing that can be done to improve achievement for those who are struggling.

This simply isn't true. There are things that can be done to improve the outcome for students, and we should continue to work to try to improve the success of all students. This doesn't mean that you expect everyone to achieve equally, just that you can help people achieve more than they would have without the help.

I also find this argument a bit paradoxical; if you truly believe that innate ability is the only determining factor for how well students do, then why do you worry about handicapping those who are capable? It shouldn't matter if we force them into classes they are too advanced for, since how we educate them doesn't matter and only natural talent matters.

It seems that you believe schooling does affect achievement, since you want to make sure we aren't holding back the high achievers, yet you are saying at the same time we shouldn't worry about how we educate the low achievers because they are stuck where they are no matter what. You can't argue that it matters for high achievers but not for low achievers, that doesn't make any sense.

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

#372
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is calculus an important highschool goal? I feel like I may have benefited more if that time was spent on statistical literacy than calculus. I encounter stats very often in my adult life, calculus style problems are rare and I don't remember the formulas offhand, so end up just looking up what I need.

I think if the policy was "calculus isn't an important goal, we should actually teach stats" the reaction would be different. I give the edge to calculus because it allows students to go right into physics and be able to graduate college with an engineering degree in four years (saving them time and money), but any challenging quantitative material would be good for their development. The big picture goal is to show…

> any challenging quantitative material would be good for their development.

I think this is key. What exactly they study may not be quite as important as whether or not they are actually getting an opportunity to do some form of challenging mathematics.

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

#373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> we don't want to send the message that some kids are just bad at math But some kids are just bad at math. Some kids are bad at sports, music, dance, etc. Some kids are good at some things and kids are good at different things.

Yes, some kids are bad at math... but they could be better than they are.

Let's use your example of sports, for example. Yes, no matter how much I train and practice running, I will never be as fast as Usain Bolt... but I sure will be faster than if I didn't practice at all.

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

#374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR: algebra != arithmetic AKA real math doesn't use numbers I'm only good at _arithmetic_ because of making Warhammer 40k armies (true story bro). I'm good at _algebra_ because I was taught well, on top of a knack. Speed with basic algebraic operations was very helpful in many places but speed with arithmetic operations has only been helpful in board games. I don't think anyone here would disagree with your point…

But strong arithmetic fundamentals are absolutely necessary for strong algebra. I've watched kids struggle with basic algebra because when they don't instantly recognize that 7x8=56, they also don't recognize that 7zx8z=56z(edit: squared). Edit: thanks to the reply; HN ate my superscript 2. Apparently it doesn't like the unicode multiplication x, either: × ² ?

Hmm. Alright, I can see solid arithmetic being good for introducing the concept of a variable...

...but the only time I ever saw significant numbers when actually doing math was in toy problems that deliberately chose weird, big coefficients, where the arithmetic part was by far the least significant.

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

#375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As narcissistic as I am, I don’t think I’m “talented.” I’m just like everybody else — can get pretty decent at a lot of things. But also just like everybody else I like to pretend I’m talented at the things I put work into. And I like to pretend that people who are good at things I haven’t put work into are talented in a way that I’m not.

As narcissistic as I am, I don’t think I’m “talented.” Huh. To me it seems more narcissistic for someone to say that they have no special talent and that their success is entirely due to their superior work ethic and years of study and sacrifice. I’m just like everybody else — can get pretty decent at a lot of things. That's a very different claim than "innate talent doesn't exist".

> That's a very different claim than "innate talent doesn't exist".

Yes! This is why I never said innate talent doesn’t exist.

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

#376
The worst thing about the CMF effort is that it would only deepen the disparities between rich and poor. Public education is often the only shot poor kids have to gain knowledge and skills that might propel them into STEM fields.

Do we need to mail copies of Stand and Deliver to the entire California school board? Or am I the only one that recalls that movie... based on something that actually happened... in California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaime_Escalante

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

#377
post #128
post #27

From the original letter: While well-intentioned, we believe that many of the changes proposed by the CMF are deeply misguided and will disproportionately harm under-resourced students. Adopting them would result in a student population that is less prepared to succeed in STEM and other 4-year quantitative degrees in college. The CMF states that 'many students, parents, and teachers encourage acceleration beginning i…

Is calculus an important highschool goal? I feel like I may have benefited more if that time was spent on statistical literacy than calculus. I encounter stats very often in my adult life, calculus style problems are rare and I don't remember the formulas offhand, so end up just looking up what I need.

The quality of mathematical arguments presented in AP Calculus are significantly higher than other "standard" high school courses. So to the extent that it is a nationwide program that promotes some careful learning, it is a big plus.

I think statistical literacy is also important, but more than anything I think students benefit from learning how to think about hard(er) problems. If they learn that in statistics, great.

Generally I would say easy courses is the real problem, not content.

However, many many students enter college engineering programs with 1-2 semesters of calculus, so not having it could be a competitive disadvantage - presumably to your understanding of those first year classes.

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

#378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's pretty simple: - calculus if you want to do engineering - discrete mathematics if you want to do CS You can teach these in university, it's not a problem. Calculus doesn't need to be taught in high school to everyone but it should be available and it should be the goal state in terms of curriculum pace for everyone so that you should have no problem taking it by the time you are 17 or 18 (which is what we're tal…

> - calculus if you want to do engineering > - discrete mathematics if you want to do CS I'd guess the vast majority of software development jobs are like "gluing one API layer to another" and "writing simple-to-complex CRUD apps". Neither calculus or discrete mathematics really helps if your goal is to simply make a computer read data from database X and display it in webform Y. I found all of the math required by m…

The majority of MDs are reading charts or diagnosing the flu or allergies or stitching up a wound, why should they understand biochemistry?

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

#379
post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that those beliefs are a workable explanation here. These proposals come from committees and groups of people, and it's just not realistic to write off the entire group of people behind these proposals as having some uniform set of beliefs like that, especially when they give other rationales for the proposals! The current school system makes decisions in middle school (8th grade and earlier) which dete…

While I agree that the proposals are bad, I don't blame "committees full of government employees". One of the lead proponents/authors is distinguished Stanford Professor Jo Boaler. It's interesting that a lot of the arguments made in favor of the changes are done in the name of equity, but Boaler herself has been put on the wrong side of racial equity, threatening to call the cops on a Black Berkeley CS professor. Th…

> One of the lead proponents/authors is distinguished Stanford Professor Jo Boaler..

I have an issue with the parent's gossipy put-down of Professor Boaler.

I think it's important to emphasize that genuine intellectuals who have put serious thought into this proposal support it. I would prefer more serious engagement with it, even if on HN the majority disagree.

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

#380
post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was joking, I meant the QED box.

I know about QED, but I am not familiar with the concept of "QED box". A cursory web search yielded nothing.

It’s a symbol that goes by many names: the tombstone, end-of-proof, or Q.E.D.

"∎"

Post reply on HN