Live data from Hacker News

The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

quillette.com

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#21
I like calculus and I've always liked it more than other branches of mathematics. That's not to say that I consider myself a true expert in the subject as I'm not (I still find some aspects of the subject difficult).

I like calculus because it allows us to put a measure on how things in our world change, it greatly simplifies our calculations of the rate at which these changes occur than we would otherwise be without it.

Things in this universe are rarely fixed, unchanging and immutable and the fact that they're not is why the universe works as it does, and it's why we exist and are around to actually study it. Calculus is a principal tool in helping us make observations about how the universe works.

From my experience, probably the single biggest problem with calculus is its frightening reputation. There's likely nothing better to give someone a lifelong phobia of calculus than for a teacher to say to him or her as a kid 'you must be very good at arithmetic if you are ever to be good at that advanced subject calculus'.

When I was a kid calculus had a frightening and awesome reputation for being difficult so by the time we'd reached highschool and were confronted with learning it many kids already had preconceived notions that they weren't going to do well in the subject.

This notion about calculus being difficult isn't new and it goes back a long way. Only a few days ago I read a HN story about physicist Richard Feynman learning calculus as a teenager and that he learned it from an early type of 'teach yourself' book titled Calculus Made Easy (1914) by Silvanus Thompson. I'd not seen this book previously so out of curiosity about how the great man came to learn the subject I downloaded a copy and it was an eye-opener.

Its Chapter I titled To Deliver You from the Preliminary Terrors, only confirmed the fact that not only my generation of kids had been forewarned of calculus' 'terrors' but also so had previous generations of kids - even those long before the author's time. Thompson, an electrical engineer, professor of physics and educator, was well aware of its 'terror' factor ipso facto the chapter's title. In only one half pages of the most delightfully written prose for a mathematics text he attempts to alleviate the reader's fears with simple straightforward explanations. Therein he explains the dreaded 'd' as simply meaning 'a little bit of' so dx means a little but of x. (In my opinion all educators of the subject would do well to read this chapter.)

Despite Thompson's best efforts to dispel fears of calculus they still remain with many of us today. Perhaps the reason why the students referred to in the article failed calculus is that they've carried this preconceived notion of its difficulty with them from their earliest days and that the level of (or the subject material) wasn't appropriate to their courses.

I'm not in favor of removing calculus from courses because I believe it is necessary to understand what it teaches us about the world, as it explains the underpinnings of almost everything we do, especially so the physical world, and we need to have some knowledge of how that happens.

If I could I would go even further than Thompson and teach calculus to primary school kids. Get in early enough and kids wouldn't have time to develop a fear of the subject.

For skeptics who say we can't teach anything meaningful about calculus at that age then they ought to think again.

For instance, getting kids to learn Simpson's Rule by showing them how to work out the area under a curve by having them cut out rectangles of cardboard and best-fitting them to the area is well within their capabilities. Couple this with a stress on how important this is in real world siutations and we'd be well on the way.

Then there's the old fable about the frog on a stone in the middle of a pool who wants to jump to the outside bank. At first he jumps half way and then a quarter and then an eighth and so on as he tires. Every kid knows this story and that the poor hapless frog never makes it.

Now teach kids the frog really doesn't perish after all - because our hero Calculus says his feet are too big. Happy ending.

(Apologies to any mathematicians whose sensibilities I've offended.)

___

Edit: I should have stressed that in professions that have a less rigorous dependence on mathematical calculations, their calculus courses should place more emphasis on the meaning of what it teaches us rather than the manipulation of symbols and equations per se.

(Humans have always had difficulties in recognizing small and large rates of change - exponential growth etc. - especially in their early stages (when often still manageable).

We should always emphasize to students why calculus is an essential tool for processing the mathematics of rates of change. In many cases understanding the underlying reasons is more important than doing calculations (if one actually understands the problem then one can always call on someone with better mathematical knowledge - after all, at times even the best did this - Einstein for instance).

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#22

"This student had lost four credits’ worth of tuition money, in return for nothing but a lower GPA" Haha, that's what it means when you fail these days. " lost " Wow

apparently, because his GPA, he can't find any job and the only thing can d is waiting for starve and die.

What companies even care about gpa

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#23
post #19

I have one point to add to the topic. The author claimed that calculus is required to biology major in many colleges. I would argue the opposite, I thought at two different universities and talked to many people. They always find it strange that it is not required for most biology fields. There is even an American invention called algebra based physics. This for people in biology who never saw calculus and your try t…

Definitely. Biology is no calc, biochem takes a good degree of calc but these fields have quite a different depth of underatanding

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#24
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You analogy doesn't hold. You don't need to understand most things (if any) to drive a car. But applying doing. statistical calculation, interpretation and everything else needs to he done with understanding. To understand why you take this distribution function over the other, you will need to understand them which means you need to understand motr fundamental concepts. surprisingly, they depend on your calculus und…

If we take this to the extreme, should they have to study real analysis so they understand where calculus comes from as well, or would you prefer we start at set theory? Maybe we should delve into philosophy to understand the basis of mathematics so we can truly understand our statistics. The point is that you have to pick a cut-off somewhere as your foundation to build upon. I doubt much understanding of calculus is…

You don't need to understand where is calculus come from to tqke real analysis. Hell most academics who use calculus everyday did not study real analysis and they are fine. This extreme angle is not relevant. The difference is that you can't fot example understand physics without calculus but you can understand and study calculus without real analysis.

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#26
It's worth remembering that math departments have a large service component: They teach courses for majors in other departments, because that is what those other departments want - and in fact, teaching other majors produces most of the credit hours taught in math departments. So they tell us what math courses their majors will take, and sometimes even what topics their majors need to see. We just do what we're told! :-)

Sometimes the math is needed for courses in the other major; for example, if an earth science major is taking a fluid dynamics course in their major, they'll need 3 terms of calc, and maybe differential equations and linear algebra. This is not to say that all majors in a department will use all the math they're required to take. I once asked a colleague in chemistry how often they actually needed to do derivatives or integrals; she replied that many chemists (e.g. experimental chemists) would rarely need calculus, but people in theoretical chemistry would. The simplest thing is often to require all majors in a given field to take the same math courses, even if only a few will use all of it.

The CS department at the school I retired from seems to have shifted its math requirements from 2 terms of calc to one term, plus stuff like statistics and linear algebra. (I don't recall all the details.)

Another reason for math requirements being what they are is that certain math courses are required for other departments to have their programs accredited. A while ago we were revising the syllabus for the calc course which was taken by business majors. I asked the business department chair if they had any comments or suggestions; he thought everything was okay, but wanted to verify that certain topics were in there (I think maxima and minima was one). He said their program accreditors wanted to see it.

I think other departments gradually adjust math requirements for their majors; it's in their interest to ensure their majors are prepared for jobs or grad school So if you graduated a while ago and you feel that the math you took wasn't that useful (and you have suggestions for alternatives), take a moment and mail your old department and let them know - they'll appreciate it, and you'll be helping future students.

Re: The case for ending calculus requirements for science majors

#27
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we take this to the extreme, should they have to study real analysis so they understand where calculus comes from as well, or would you prefer we start at set theory? Maybe we should delve into philosophy to understand the basis of mathematics so we can truly understand our statistics. The point is that you have to pick a cut-off somewhere as your foundation to build upon. I doubt much understanding of calculus is…

You don't need to understand where is calculus come from to tqke real analysis. Hell most academics who use calculus everyday did not study real analysis and they are fine. This extreme angle is not relevant. The difference is that you can't fot example understand physics without calculus but you can understand and study calculus without real analysis.

> Hell most academics who use calculus everyday did not study real analysis and they are fine.

That's an American perspective, I believe.

In many European countries, many STEM students routinely learn real analysis. In fact, the term "calculus" doesn't even exist in e.g. German, it's all called "Analysis". Sure, a course tailored for physicists, chemists or computer scientists may (or may not, depending on the institutions) have a different focus, may emphasise proofs less etc., but the underlying concepts (what are the real numbers, completeness) are generally taught.

Post reply on HN