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

Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

fliptomato.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 124 posts

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#41

Post by whatwhat »

manicbovine wrote: post #22

As a mathematician, I see this as a sign that my field needs an evangelist.

Can I ask you a question?

Why is rote memorization frowned upon in math?

I'm a second year math student about to enter his third year. I enter a lot of the definitions, theorems, etc. into a flash card software (Anki) for memorization. I combine this with doing tons of proofs and problems from various textbooks depending upon the course I'm studying. I would say from personal experience that rote memorization has definitely helped me: (1) understand the math better; (2) excel in exams, and; (3) able to solve extra and harder problems from books.

So I'm struggling to see why rote memorization is bad. Is not memory useful for justifying knowledge? I'm not saying memorization is the only thing. Just that it seems to build the foundation for everything else, as per Bloom's cognitive taxonomy: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Bloom%27s_Tax...

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#42

Post by dmlorenzetti »

carbocation wrote: post #30
dmlorenzetti wrote: post #21

The author calls out med students for approaching physics through rote memorization. It reminds me of an experience my older brother and I had with a doctor friend. Our friend, an OB/GYN, mentioned how hard her work is, because "the average baby is born at 3am." We laughed, but then my brother asked, "What does 'average' mean when you have a 24-hour clock? It must mean the modal time or something like that." I contri…

The charitable interpretation (for your OB friend) is that she was not speaking literally, and got bored when you started perseverating on her hyperbole. The more likely explanation is that your analysis is indeed correct.

Yes, and obviously I condensed the anecdote. Some aspects of the situation warranted charity (for example, we'd all traveled a long way to be there). Other aspects of her personality point to a basic lack of interest in anything outside her areas of expertise.

And obviously it's just an anecdote-- my friend doesn't represent all doctors. Nor am I detailing her many excellent qualities (she truly cares about her patients and those around her).

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#43

Post by carbocation »

ehsanul wrote: post #40
carbocation wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two page rebuttal that was written by Jane Monaco is among Jane Monaco's selected publications. (You linked us to Jane Monaco's page, not Mary Tai's.)

That is what the GP thought was interesting. So do I.

I see; I misunderstood the intent of the link.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#44

Post by carbocation »

dmlorenzetti wrote: post #42
carbocation wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The charitable interpretation (for your OB friend) is that she was not speaking literally, and got bored when you started perseverating on her hyperbole. The more likely explanation is that your analysis is indeed correct.

Yes, and obviously I condensed the anecdote. Some aspects of the situation warranted charity (for example, we'd all traveled a long way to be there). Other aspects of her personality point to a basic lack of interest in anything outside her areas of expertise. And obviously it's just an anecdote-- my friend doesn't represent all doctors. Nor am I detailing her many excellent qualities (she truly cares about her patie…

I'm in medical school and took absolutely no offense; your storytelling was quite reasonable.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#45

Post by carbocation »

mbreese wrote: post #37
Leptosiphon wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calculus is not taught to everyone in high school. Many students only make it as far as precalculus and many more, even if they take calculus in high school do not learn integration. At the college level, many biology students do not take calculus. As far as calculus being a requirement for entrance into med school, in many cases I am afraid you are incorrect. http://www.cse.emory.edu/sciencenet/additional_math_reqs.…

Calculus, per se, isn't a requirement, but physics is covered pretty heavily on the MCAT. And last I checked, you needed calculus for college level physics.

Calculus-based physics is not tested on the MCAT. Or, at least, no calculus is required for the physics portion of the exam.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#46

Post by jfager »

dmlorenzetti wrote: post #21

The author calls out med students for approaching physics through rote memorization. It reminds me of an experience my older brother and I had with a doctor friend. Our friend, an OB/GYN, mentioned how hard her work is, because "the average baby is born at 3am." We laughed, but then my brother asked, "What does 'average' mean when you have a 24-hour clock? It must mean the modal time or something like that." I contri…

Or she knew that the term "average" can just as validly refer to the mode as the mean, and was bored by the whole exercise.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#47

Post by enneff »

noonespecial wrote: post #17

I'd laugh a lot harder when people struggle for days and then reach a half-assed piece of some algorithm that's completely well know if I hadn't been there a dozen times myself. Programmers are especially vulnerable to this. Who hasn't made a 4 page case statement when 3 lines of recursion would have done it, especially when starting out? Then again, I've never named my case statements after myself. No matter how bri…

I would concur, but this is rediscovering a basic mathematical tool that I was taught in a normal math class at high school. Embarrassing.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#48

Post by gilesc »

silverlake wrote: post #28

My brother is a medical researcher. Much of his work involves statistics, but he's never taken a statistics course nor read an intro book. So a lot of his results are just basic high school stats and pretty graphs, nothing deeper. It would be funny if it weren't medicine.

I'm a biochemistry grad student, and my school is just now considering offering a (bio)statistics course for the first time... But parent poster is right, chi-squared is usually as complex as it gets.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#49

Post by enneff »

whatwhat wrote: post #41
manicbovine wrote: post #22

As a mathematician, I see this as a sign that my field needs an evangelist.

Can I ask you a question? Why is rote memorization frowned upon in math? I'm a second year math student about to enter his third year. I enter a lot of the definitions, theorems, etc. into a flash card software (Anki) for memorization. I combine this with doing tons of proofs and problems from various textbooks depending upon the course I'm studying. I would say from personal experience that rote memorization has def…

Everything I remember about maths I remember because I understood the "why" of it. The stuff I learned rote - just to pass the exams - I have long since forgotten. I'm now frustrated that I was expected to learn anything by rote, as it's all lost to the sands of time now.

Rote memorization might help you with exams and book problems, but it won't help you develop long-term mathematical problem-solving skills. If you can't explain it from first principles, you don't truly understand it.

Re: Medical researcher discovers integration, gets 75 citations

#50

Post by tel »

whatwhat wrote: post #41
manicbovine wrote: post #22

As a mathematician, I see this as a sign that my field needs an evangelist.

Can I ask you a question? Why is rote memorization frowned upon in math? I'm a second year math student about to enter his third year. I enter a lot of the definitions, theorems, etc. into a flash card software (Anki) for memorization. I combine this with doing tons of proofs and problems from various textbooks depending upon the course I'm studying. I would say from personal experience that rote memorization has def…

Not the intended target, but I'll throw in my two c from doing a lot of applied math.

Math readily has two components. The first is a formulaic, formal component that can be readily overcome by rote. The second is the more freeform conceptual understanding that motivates and directs the first. I feel confident that if you ask anyone familiar with advanced math if they understand concept/theorem/tool X, they'll say yes if they know it in the second form and are confident that they can reconstruct the important parts of it in the first.

I think a lot of why people rebel against rote memorization then is that it, as a method, is very likely to prevent you from encountering the second side there. If you honestly use it to improve your fluency with the formal manipulations, it can be a great tool for learning more math. It's just easy to lose that honesty.

To really understand math, you need to recognize that it's a language you must both read and write. I suggest that if you do get strong benefits from rote memorization, then you should complimen t your reading by attempting to synthesize mathematical concepts you've not seen before. Read the claim of a theorem and then prove it yourself without knowing the answer. If you can honestly complete mathematical synthesis at that level as well, then rote memorization isn't hurting you in the least.

Post reply on HN