Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

scottaaronson.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 657 posts

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

#491

Post by honkdaddy »

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…

I know it's considered good form on HN to beat around the bush a bit when it comes to sensitive culture war topics, but I think it's worth pointing for the non-Americans here that the only reason this discussion is even happening is because of the demographics which are observed after the "split" occurs.

Black and Latino students are overrepresented in underperforming math classes, while White and Asian students are overrepresented in the high-performing math class. That's literally the only reason there's any controversy, and if said disparity didn't exist, or if the races were reversed, then we wouldn't be having this discussion whatsoever.

If you approached athletics with the same strategy, you'd end up with a similarly wonky outcome. Consider that Asian students have always been highly underrepresented in high school football.

> “When kids struggle, they immediately say ‘I don’t have a football body,’” Boaler said. “That changes how the body operates.”

Is the equitable conclusion to change the rules of football so Asian students perform better? Surely not, right?

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

#492

Post by WalterBright »

Angostura wrote: post #477
WalterBright wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Statistics for Sociology An acquaintance asked me if she should take "Calculus for Artists" after I suggested she take a calculus course. I laughed, and said that such a course should be named "Pretend to Learn Calculus". She should take a real calculus course, which she did, and did well in it. If you're in college, stick to the real math classes, not the "math for losers who are forced to take a math class". You'…

> I laughed, and said that such a course should be named "Pretend to Learn Calculus". Was that based on actual knowledge of the course content?

I read the course description, although that wasn't necessary. The title gave the game away.

It's like "Flight School for Artists". There's no such thing.

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

#493

Post by HWR_14 »

kurthr wrote: 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…

I could see replacing Calculus with Statistics as a goal for High School. It seems more broadly applicable, and both are offered at the AP level. But that doesn't seem to be this.

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

#494

Post by HWR_14 »

commandlinefan wrote: post #320
H8crilA wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does "calculus" here mean? I'm not American, no idea what's included in that word and what's outside, in this context. Does it mean limits, derivatives, integration (Newton), maybe even some high level talk about ODEs for the "very best" schools? Anything more, anything less? Also, in case anyone is also wondering, 8th grade means 13-14 years old.

> limits, derivatives, integration (Newton), maybe even some high level talk about ODEs My son is taking high school BC Calculus (one step above "AP" calculus) this year. It includes limits, derivatives, integration (including integration by parts and partial fraction decomposition), ordinary differential equations, infinite series and taylor/mcluarin series.

> My son is taking high school BC Calculus (one step above "AP" calculus) this year.

BC Calculus is the advanced version of AP calculus, not "one step above". Ideally people are moved into AB or BC Calculus based on skill level, but only take one AP course.

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

#495

Post by csa »

7speter wrote: post #342
klodolph wrote: post #215

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…

I don’t necessarily agree with the proposal in california, but do all students need to take calculus in high school? What about solid coverage of algebra 2 and pre calc before higher education. Community college is a great place to take a calc class (or even a pre calc class) affordably. Source: took pre calc, calc and stat in community college after being signalled to that I was terrible at math throughout high scho…

> but do all students need to take calculus in high school?

Imho, 50% or more of students don’t even need to take algebra.

For that matter, that same number pretty much don’t even need to go to high school (although some sort of voluntary coop with practical skills training might be better than current high school or nothing).

HS is glorified baby sitting for most students. It sometimes is useful for people who want to go to “competitive” schools or enter stem fields in slightly less competitive schools.

As for your solution, learning math starting at algebra or pre-calc in a CC is fine if that is what the person needs for their chosen career path. I think the general idea is that the lack of calculus in high schools prunes the career path tree fairly aggressively in some relatively well-paid fields (esp. STEM).

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

#496

Post by [deleted] »

deanCommie wrote: post #336
TimPC wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Professor of Mathematics Education is a role that fits into a woke section of academia and generally publishes woke forms of advocate research. Many people can study mathematics education without studying much mathematics at all. When the Mathematicians and Scientists are screaming that the policy is nonsense, I'm not convinced by an advocacy researcher saying it's rigorous work.

https://twitter.com/sfmnemonic/status/1504687870006620163 Can you make specific arguments instead of devolving to shorthand dogwhistles that are completely up to the interpretation of the reader. The term 'woke' has no meaning, depending on the context it's anything between "We should shame all white people for the crimes of their ancestors" to "We should make a movie with a female lead". By using it, you leave it am…

[deleted]

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

#497

Post by paulcole »

Aunche wrote: post #456
paulcole wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A regular person can probably be trained to 95% the skill of an anesthesiologist just by following instructions, but then they would kill the patient during edge cases. You’re making the mistake of assuming anesthesiologists are something other than regular people with training.

Anyone who makes it through medical school is definitely smart by some standard, especially if they end up in a highly competitive specialty like anesthesiology. Does all that intelligence translate to talent for being an anesthesiologist? Probably not, but I'm sure a lot of it does.

I think this is where we’ll really disagree. Completing med school is a function of opportunity, determination, and to a much lesser degree intelligence. Doctors are just people and people have roughly the same innate abilities.

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

#498

Post by rayiner »

smugma wrote: post #337
klodolph wrote: post #215

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…

It's mind boggling to me that this Twitter fight gone wrong is a bigger deal to people than the lack of scientific rigor in Boaler's work.

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

#499

Post by junar »

WhyOhWhyQ wrote: post #453

I'd be interested in trying out the following idea: How about we don't mandate mathematics and science courses in high school, and especially in early college? The benefits of this are two-fold. The people who want to pursue other interests are freer to do so. And, more importantly to me as a mathematics graduate student, the people who are interested in math and science can go much much faster, and attain a higher l…

> As far as I can tell, most other countries with successful mathematics cultures operate more like this.

Which country do you mean? As far as I'm aware, it's the opposite: countries like China and South Korea have math as a required subject on their college entrance exams for all students. The non-STEM students may have fewer requirements, but I'm fairly sure they've still learned more than the average American high school student.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaokao#Reform_of_the_National_...

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

https://medium.com/@yujia_jo/2016-jiangsu-gaokao-national-hi...

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

#500

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

andrewprock wrote: post #471
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad analogy. Being able to understand statistics at an everyday usage level is the equivalent of being able to read and write. Understanding calculus needed for statistics is the equivalent of needing to understand Latin or comparative linguistics. Noble and useful pursuits for sure, but you can get far with an educated society that just knows how to read and write even if they're iffy on the Latin roots of it all.

This is quite clearly false. Most people on the planet have zero to little understanding of statistics. They get by just fine. The field of Calculus is actually fairly simple compared to stats. By and large calculus is the study of the slope of a line, and the area under the curve. Statistics is more complicated philosophically and computationally, as you do in fact need calculus to do statistics, since a fundamental…

You've misunderstood my post. I'm not arguing that needing to understand statistics is the same as needing to be able to read and write; I was responding to a post that was arguing that teaching stats without the underpinnings of calculus is like a society that is barely literate.

> Statistics is more complicated philosophically and computationally, as you do in fact need calculus to do statistics

This is just fundamentally false, as there are many statistical concepts and introductory statistics courses (given at some of the most renowned universities in the world) that can be taught without an underpinning of calculus. It's like arguing that you can't teach a programming class until someone understands digital logic design.

Post reply on HN