Live data from Hacker News

How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

gowers.wordpress.com

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#61
post #35

If anyone cares to share, I'd love to hear some opinions about at what point someone switches from "non-mathematician" status to "mathematician" status.

I'm thinking of an analogy: Musicians. The definition covers all levels of involvement and skill, but every "musician" pursues some amount of musical activity and learning, voluntarily.

Nobody has a choice about math in K-12 school, though there are kids who will choose the more advanced classes on their own. For instance my daughter proactively convinced her high school to let her skip a grade in math.

In college, you can choose to major in math, or in a math intensive subject like CS or physics. Within those disciplines, you can choose the more mathematical specialties. In the work world, you can volunteer for assignments that involve math, or get a reputation for being willing to solve hard math problems. That's me.

I don't see it as a "switch" because my interest in math was evident (so I'm told) before I could even talk.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#62
post #46

Do other disciplines ask similar questions? How should physics be taught to non-physicists? How should writing be taught to non-writers? How should car maintenance be taught to non-mechanics? I guess my point is, why should we teach mathematics any differently to "non-mathematicians" than we do to "mathematicians"? I mean, at the point when you're first teaching someone, how do you even know if they're a "non-mathema…

When I was in school I taught a physics lab to non-physicists, and this was a conversation professors and I had. Granted this was at university level so most people had an idea about whether they (thought they) were a math person or not. I went in with a completely different philosophy to that class than with physicists. Because here's the thing, a physicist will care about different things than the non-physicist.

What I focused on was less of the physics and mathematics and more on making sure they gained an intuition about how nature works and how to think critically. These people didn't need the same toolbox as the ones trying to get a degree in physics or engineering. I could care less if these students knew the equations for Newton's laws, but I did care if they had an intuition. I didn't care if they had Bernoulli's principle memorized, but I did care if they could analyze an experiment.

The difference is that these people needed different skills in their lives. You must know it is popular to say things like "School taught me the Pythagorean theorem but not how to do my taxes." These people aren't realizing that math is giving them a toolbox that can help them do their taxes and other things. I teach my young nephews math whenever I visit them. They don't care about it in school but they like what I teach them because I make it fun and challenging. You can get a lot of topics covered and a lot of ideas and principles conveyed if you aren't worried about them being able to do every case. An example of this being that the basic principles of calculus can be used in your daily life and could benefit everyone (thinking about things like rates of change, tangents, series, limits, and squeeze theorem), but they won't need to be able to take the derivative of a function unless they are going into a job that requires that.

So I guess what I'm getting at is that there is a lot of benefit from math to the average person without actually requiring them to be fluent in the language. Think about this like being a moderate speaker in a second language but not being able to write or hold a deep conversation. They have a lot of advantages over someone who might know more about the written language and grammar, but don't know many words. I think the same argument of learning basic phrases in a second language would apply here as well. Most people don't need to be fluent, but we are teaching them like they are.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#63
post #45

Teaching mathematics has two aspects, or goals, that are largely not related to one another. One is teaching mathematical methods as a computational tool, as used in a certain area of expertise (such as, for instance, electrical engineering). The other one is teaching how to do mathematics , i.e. how to generalize facts, find efficient proofs and algorithms, etc.

I've always thought one of the most important goals of learning math was learning how to think logically. This may be coming from a physics perspective where the language is used because it is (arguable)the most accurate tool we have to analyze the world around us.

The average person doesn't need efficient proofs and algorithms. But they can use generalized facts.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#65
post #46

Do other disciplines ask similar questions? How should physics be taught to non-physicists? How should writing be taught to non-writers? How should car maintenance be taught to non-mechanics? I guess my point is, why should we teach mathematics any differently to "non-mathematicians" than we do to "mathematicians"? I mean, at the point when you're first teaching someone, how do you even know if they're a "non-mathema…

I agree with "we should teach mathematics to non-mathematicians in the same way we do to mathematicians". But I do not agree with teaching mathematicians the same way as we do to non-maths. I personally was taught like non-math. And it was a pain. It was boring. Every year I finished reading through math textbooks in a month, it was fun. But then the rest of the year it was a total boredom. I hated math classes for this. Literature classes was much more fun, than maths, despite I didn't like all those stupid discussions about stupid books of stupid authors.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#66
post #45

Teaching mathematics has two aspects, or goals, that are largely not related to one another. One is teaching mathematical methods as a computational tool, as used in a certain area of expertise (such as, for instance, electrical engineering). The other one is teaching how to do mathematics , i.e. how to generalize facts, find efficient proofs and algorithms, etc.

I've always thought one of the most important goals of learning math was learning how to think logically. This may be coming from a physics perspective where the language is used because it is (arguable)the most accurate tool we have to analyze the world around us. The average person doesn't need efficient proofs and algorithms. But they can use generalized facts.

I think that the idea that studying math is necessary to train one's logical abilities is a misconception. Learning any of the sort of non-trivial activities, such as cooking, which requires a high degree of awareness and logical thinking, would have the same side effect.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#67
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always thought one of the most important goals of learning math was learning how to think logically. This may be coming from a physics perspective where the language is used because it is (arguable)the most accurate tool we have to analyze the world around us. The average person doesn't need efficient proofs and algorithms. But they can use generalized facts.

I think that the idea that studying math is necessary to train one's logical abilities is a misconception. Learning any of the sort of non-trivial activities, such as cooking, which requires a high degree of awareness and logical thinking, would have the same side effect.

Sorry if it came off like that. I don't think it is necessary, but it sure is a helpful tool. So if we're going to teach people basic math skills we might as well focus more on this aspect so that they can use those basic skills and know why knowing how to find the angle of a triangle can be useful.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#68
These problems are examples of questions that can be tackled with the help of mathematical tools. They can show students some applications of mathematics, but IMHO they don't really teach mathematics. Maths have to do with statements and proofs about abstract objects. I'd rather learn about euclidean geometry than trying to figure out the number of piano tuner in manhattan (I'm sure most students will be bored either way).

Actually, this is an endless source of discussion among instructors, not only maths. Should classes be driven by applications in order to motivate students?

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#69
post #46

Do other disciplines ask similar questions? How should physics be taught to non-physicists? How should writing be taught to non-writers? How should car maintenance be taught to non-mechanics? I guess my point is, why should we teach mathematics any differently to "non-mathematicians" than we do to "mathematicians"? I mean, at the point when you're first teaching someone, how do you even know if they're a "non-mathema…

Yes, all the time. I've heard it for physics, I've heard it for CS and I've heard it for programming, all with good reason: the way you teach somebody deeply invested in your field is different than the way you teach somebody deeply invested in a different field, learning yours as a supplement. Or maybe a better way of putting it is that the way you teach somebody interested in a field in and of itself is different than the way you teach somebody who has other interests and motivations, but still needs to learn.

And hey, maybe before college, almost everyone is a non-mathematician. There's the small majority of students who'd love learning group theory because it's fun and beautiful, and then there's everyone else who need practical applications and real-world examples. But the way you teach them is ultimately just like the way you'd teach non-mathematicians in college or further on in life, when there's a clearer delineation.

Re: How should mathematics be taught to non-mathematicians? (2012)

#70
post #10

When you consider how mathematics, an understanding of probability, and so on enhances your ability to see through bullshit in advertising, government, and to some extent religions (not faith, just religions); it's not hard to understand why so many people are not thrilled at the notion.

Why exclude faith? For PC sake?

Faith isn't a logical process, from what I can tell, but it's also not a supposedly coherent system as most religions claim to be. Religions offer predictions (past and present), and supposedly consistent statements about morality and life, which are demonstrably inconsistent.
Post reply on HN