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

US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#91

Post by anigbrowl »

vonmoltke wrote: post #68
anigbrowl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed. As far as I can see common core defines standards of ability, rather than teaching methods. There are a bunch of awful, dreadful textbooks that claim 'common core compatibility' but which ignorant people conflate with being part of a common core syllabus, as if they are approved/endorsed by the same people who drafted the Common Core standards, whereas in reality textbook approval seems to be a an ex…

> I wish there were a single federalized syllabus, because it's not like Math works one way in Connecticut or Rhode Island and another in Texas or Arkansas. So we can replace 50 extremely politicized and corrupt processes with one massive, impenetrable, extremely politicized, and corrupt process? Otherwise, I agree. The problems are with implementation, not the standards themselves.

It might be more efficient, and has proven to be so for a bunch of other things. The nature of grade school math is not changing so fast, for example, that we need to constantly rewrite our textbooks.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#92

Post by graycat »

Once again, over again, one more time, beat up on the US over its "rotten" 'education'. Graduate/professional school? Nope. They're talking K-12. Then they are talking 'averages'. Yup.

This beating up on the US is mostly just fun from public flogging, a scam, a way to get headlines.

The US tried hard, poured in lots of money, bricks, mortar, etc., and it didn't work. Details:

Frontline video on efforts of Michelle Rhee in the DC public schools:

     http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/education-of-michelle-rhee/
Transcript

     http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/education/education-of-michelle-rhee/transcript-35/
If the Asians are so good at teaching math, then let them fix the DC public schools. Wait: Rhee is Asian. Oh, well, try the backup plan.

Okay: 'Control'. Control on country of origin.

I'll put it to you in blunt terms: Essentially the worst schools in the US do better than the schools in west Africa and Mexico. Some people won't like that point.

So, I'll give another point: How do the students in Minnesota of Norwegian descent do compared with the students in Norway?

That is, are we talking "US schools" or country of origin?

Next, for "US math", I have a right to be torqued and offended and I am: I'm a native born US citizen educated only in the US and hold a Ph.D. in engineering from one of the best research universities in the world for my research accomplishments in applied math, complete with theorems and proofs. I've done just fine in "math", thank you.

For math in Asia? From nearly all I've seen, math in Asia is not so good. I can think of some good work from Japan, but otherwise, no. For South Korea, one of their better college math majors came to the US for math grad school and right away had to conclude that they had learned no 'math' at all in college in South Korea and, instead, had just done some rote memorization with zero understanding. Then as a grad student they had to start over essentially as a freshman college math major.

But articles like the OP keep talking about K-12 'math' where likely they mean mostly just simple arithmetic; not a biggie.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#93

Post by esbranson »

mikegioia wrote: post #56
nickff wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any direct evidence of this? I ask because it is well known that math ability is correlated with educational achievement, and level of education is known to be correlated with income. Putting these two together, I would suppose that math ability is correlated with income.

I'm not saying that greater math ability doesn't correlate to greater wealth. That could very well be true (and it probably is). What I meant was that the public school system is funded by tax dollars. Wealthier neighborhoods contribute more tax money and have better public schools. I obviously don't have any direct evidence, but I would sat there's almost no correlation to wealthy neighborhoods and their residents b…

Well, I think you're hitting on something.

1. I think you're wrong about the lack of correlation and, as nickff points out, better math ability is correlated with higher income, but

2. Math ability does not affect income.

Correlation is not causation. The better math ability is a side effect of higher income in my opinion, not vise-versa.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#94

Post by esbranson »

aurelian wrote: post #80
mikegioia wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an annoying response. You link me an 18 page PDF and call it direct evidence? Did you even read what I said? I'm not arguing that greater math ability doesn't correlate to greater wealth! This issue boils down to wealthier neighborhoods getting more money to invest in better math education for their students. That's it! Are you claiming that all rich people are good at math? Or that only people good at math are…

Your belief is wrong. All research on the subject tells us that spending has at most a small impact on test scores. I'd link you to PDFs but I know how you feel about that.

I think you're wrong, and that spending does have a huge impact on test scores; the PDF you link even supports that higher family income correlates with higher test scores. My argument assumes that wealthier families spend more than less wealthier ones.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#95

Post by aurelian »

esbranson wrote: post #94
aurelian wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your belief is wrong. All research on the subject tells us that spending has at most a small impact on test scores. I'd link you to PDFs but I know how you feel about that.

I think you're wrong, and that spending does have a huge impact on test scores; the PDF you link even supports that higher family income correlates with higher test scores. My argument assumes that wealthier families spend more than less wealthier ones.

The evidence is not on your side.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/04/07/study-no-link-betw...

You can downvote me but you still have no evidence for your beliefs.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#96

Post by tokenadult »

esbranson wrote: post #82
ahomescu1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computation is what computers do best. There's so much more to mathematics than computation. Computers aren't anywhere near humans at discovering properties and proving them (in other words, proving theorems).

I'm pretty sure a computer could be used to solve most International Mathematical Olympiad problems quicker and more reliably. Its not an argument that computers are better at creating the theory that is used to solve the problems. In essence, I'm saying the International Mathematical Olympiad is not a competition about forming or proving theorems. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the competition essentially determ…

I'm saying the International Mathematical Olympiad is not a competition about forming or proving theorems.

This statement shows you have utterly no familiarity with the content of most International Mathematical Olympiad problems, which are typically posed as open-ended problems for which the contestants must provide written solutions with proof.

Correct me if I'm wrong

This is one of the rare cases where I can recommend a Wikipedia article for more reading on the topic.

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

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#97

Post by wil421 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #61
wil421 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tutors, I used them in college once I left my parents house. You can find free tutors on most college campuses for challenging subjects, Math Chemistry etc. If you are still in high school you can find many online resources to help, Youtube Kahn Academy etc... Just because you are bad at something doesn't mean you cant find someone to help your kid whether its a relative, neighbor, tutor or old teacher.

Any parent can give encouragement and demand their kid work hard, but a parent without knowledge has no way of assessing whether a tutor or other pedagogical assistant is any good. Try thinking about this in the context of something that you're not good at.

>something that you're not good at.

This was kinda my message but it didnt come out that way. There are resources out there that are sometimes freely available you can use to get better at something you arent good at.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#98

Post by esbranson »

aurelian wrote: post #95
esbranson wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're wrong, and that spending does have a huge impact on test scores; the PDF you link even supports that higher family income correlates with higher test scores. My argument assumes that wealthier families spend more than less wealthier ones.

The evidence is not on your side. http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/04/07/study-no-link-betw... You can downvote me but you still have no evidence for your beliefs.

I actually can't downvote you. And I wouldn't. Downvoting without responding is cowardly, or at least not conducive to the aim of a civilized discussion. Its the Hacker News equivalent to anonymous hate mail. They are like rumors, and lead to distrust and aversion to frank debate, everything we should try and avoid. If someone downvotes a comment that is ultimately upvoted, the downvotes should be reassessed against themselves or something. If Wikipedia had such a mechanism the whole community would break down. Its a bad feature.

School spending is not the only spending involved. A large cost, roughly equivalent to spending, of the family is that which is spent on providing a loving, supportive, positive, non-absent relationship within the family. This costs time away from work. This costs money cultivating relationships with intelligent people. This provides affluent children with more positive influences, positive role models, and less stress that lends to more focus on learning. They tend to invest more in their children, but its not to say that a wealthy family will invest as much as a poor family with more of a focus on education. The list goes on and on. Its not as if you need to be affluent to provide or invest in these things, its just more conducive.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#99

Post by esbranson »

tokenadult wrote: post #96
esbranson wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure a computer could be used to solve most International Mathematical Olympiad problems quicker and more reliably. Its not an argument that computers are better at creating the theory that is used to solve the problems. In essence, I'm saying the International Mathematical Olympiad is not a competition about forming or proving theorems. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the competition essentially determ…

I'm saying the International Mathematical Olympiad is not a competition about forming or proving theorems. This statement shows you have utterly no familiarity with the content of most International Mathematical Olympiad problems, which are typically posed as open-ended problems for which the contestants must provide written solutions with proof. Correct me if I'm wrong This is one of the rare cases where I can recom…

Your petty insult is matched only by your willful ignorance of and refusal to address the substance of my argument:

> I'm pretty sure a computer could be used to solve most International Mathematical Olympiad problems quicker and more reliably.

Case in point:

http://www.imo-official.org/problems/IMO2010SL.pdf

> A1. Determine all functions f : R -> R such that the equality f([x]y) = f(x)[f(y)] holds for all x,y in R. Here, by [x] we denote the greatest integer not exceeding x.

Can Mathematica or another computer program solve that? I am betting it can. And very quickly. And I also reject that such a problem is open ended.

The most that the Wikipedia article speaks on the topic related to the above mentioned partial quote is

> extensive knowledge of theorems

Which does not mention actually proving any theorems. Although I may misunderstand the difference between proving a theorem and proving a solution to a given problem.

I await your lack of substantive response.

Re: US 'in denial' over poor maths standards

#100

Post by tokenadult »

esbranson wrote: post #99
tokenadult wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm saying the International Mathematical Olympiad is not a competition about forming or proving theorems. This statement shows you have utterly no familiarity with the content of most International Mathematical Olympiad problems, which are typically posed as open-ended problems for which the contestants must provide written solutions with proof. Correct me if I'm wrong This is one of the rare cases where I can recom…

Your petty insult is matched only by your willful ignorance of and refusal to address the substance of my argument: > I'm pretty sure a computer could be used to solve most International Mathematical Olympiad problems quicker and more reliably. Case in point: http://www.imo-official.org/problems/IMO2010SL.pdf > A1. Determine all functions f : R -> R such that the equality f([x]y) = f(x)[f(y)] holds for all x,y in R.…

Perhaps it suffices to say that persons who know the item content of the IMO contests intimately are very happy to hire (or recruit as students) young people who have demonstrated ability to solve the contest problems. They don't think they are gaining access to people who can be replaced by a computer program.
Post reply on HN