![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
math questions
Jan. 6th, 2010 04:24 pmYesterday i posted something, a quick and dirty post referring to a 'math test', and a blog entry from a local scientist and professor. The test was meant to test students coming into a science class for basic math skills, and the blog entry reflects this guy's frustration with the math curricula in our state that is turning out more and more college students who don't have the math skills to succeed in his science classes.
Now, i've read a lot by this guy, and i was just intrigued by the two minute math test, and i didn't bother to read the whole blog entry. I was surprised to see a few (mostly non-math) students complain the entry was really condescending and insulting. I was not expecting, but upon reflection, am not surprised that not everyone got through the whole test easily.
So, i figured i'd better go back and read the whole post. Here is the thing - i do not see it as being condescending and insulting (except, perhaps, to a few policy makers with whom he has a recognized feud over math curriculum decisions). I did not see in there a place where he claimed that everyone who could not pass the test was to be pitied or looked down upon, and i did not see a lot of blame being placed on the students who are being harmed by the current system. I did see some vitriolic words about the 'discovery math' approach. I guess that doesn't bother me, because i, too, would be frustrated if i felt like the public schools that are supposed to be educated our students were continually making decisions to use a math system that has been shown to decrease competency in college bound kids, and pretty much panned by all scientists and mathematicians who have evaluated it.
But, perhaps i cut him too much slack because i believe our public schools are NOT turning out students who are mathematically and scientifically literate, and i believe the current curriculum choices probably are a significant problem when it comes to teaching college bound students the skills they need to succeed.
On the other hand, i was thinking about the math test in question. I understand why it is a decent test for his class - a science class. Clearly, science students need to have some specific math skills that literature students don't. I'm not sure it is a good class for overall mathematical literacy.
Still, i'm not sure what is. I generally hate 'closed book' exams, because i think it is more important to be able to look up something and use the information than it is to remember it off hand. This is particularly true when you are dealing with something that you are not currently working with on a daily basis, but i also felt like it was true with engineering equations i was working with a lot. My memory is such that i often stumble on simple names, dates, equations, etc.
Why should someone who isn't working with geometry know the equation for the area of a circle? (On the other hand, that is a basic equation, so it doesn't seem like it is asking that much. Is it okay to draw a line somewhere?)
It seems like our curriculum should turn out students who are confident enough to discover the skills they need in life, if they don't have them at their finger tips. How do you test for that? At the same time, it is unreasonable for a intro level science professor to have to teach all the math skills needed for that class, so the curriculum also has to touch on that material. No matter whether we like it, it does seem like the students leaving high school should be able to pass a test with some of the basic information. It seems like it would be harder to pass the same test if the material went out of practice for ten years, but hopefully those same students would be able to catch up faster with a refresher if they needed to.
(And, for my non-math friends in particular, please note that i'm not trying to say that these math skills are more important, easier to obtain, or somehow intrinsically 'better' than the equivalent writing or debating skills. It is a problem for me, actually, because while i believe strongly that math and science education must get better, i also believe that history, reading comprehension, and writing education must get better. I happen to have more of the math and science than a lot of people, which makes me realize exactly how much i am lacking in the other fields. It is really hard to improve all this stuff at once.)
Now, i've read a lot by this guy, and i was just intrigued by the two minute math test, and i didn't bother to read the whole blog entry. I was surprised to see a few (mostly non-math) students complain the entry was really condescending and insulting. I was not expecting, but upon reflection, am not surprised that not everyone got through the whole test easily.
So, i figured i'd better go back and read the whole post. Here is the thing - i do not see it as being condescending and insulting (except, perhaps, to a few policy makers with whom he has a recognized feud over math curriculum decisions). I did not see in there a place where he claimed that everyone who could not pass the test was to be pitied or looked down upon, and i did not see a lot of blame being placed on the students who are being harmed by the current system. I did see some vitriolic words about the 'discovery math' approach. I guess that doesn't bother me, because i, too, would be frustrated if i felt like the public schools that are supposed to be educated our students were continually making decisions to use a math system that has been shown to decrease competency in college bound kids, and pretty much panned by all scientists and mathematicians who have evaluated it.
But, perhaps i cut him too much slack because i believe our public schools are NOT turning out students who are mathematically and scientifically literate, and i believe the current curriculum choices probably are a significant problem when it comes to teaching college bound students the skills they need to succeed.
On the other hand, i was thinking about the math test in question. I understand why it is a decent test for his class - a science class. Clearly, science students need to have some specific math skills that literature students don't. I'm not sure it is a good class for overall mathematical literacy.
Still, i'm not sure what is. I generally hate 'closed book' exams, because i think it is more important to be able to look up something and use the information than it is to remember it off hand. This is particularly true when you are dealing with something that you are not currently working with on a daily basis, but i also felt like it was true with engineering equations i was working with a lot. My memory is such that i often stumble on simple names, dates, equations, etc.
Why should someone who isn't working with geometry know the equation for the area of a circle? (On the other hand, that is a basic equation, so it doesn't seem like it is asking that much. Is it okay to draw a line somewhere?)
It seems like our curriculum should turn out students who are confident enough to discover the skills they need in life, if they don't have them at their finger tips. How do you test for that? At the same time, it is unreasonable for a intro level science professor to have to teach all the math skills needed for that class, so the curriculum also has to touch on that material. No matter whether we like it, it does seem like the students leaving high school should be able to pass a test with some of the basic information. It seems like it would be harder to pass the same test if the material went out of practice for ten years, but hopefully those same students would be able to catch up faster with a refresher if they needed to.
(And, for my non-math friends in particular, please note that i'm not trying to say that these math skills are more important, easier to obtain, or somehow intrinsically 'better' than the equivalent writing or debating skills. It is a problem for me, actually, because while i believe strongly that math and science education must get better, i also believe that history, reading comprehension, and writing education must get better. I happen to have more of the math and science than a lot of people, which makes me realize exactly how much i am lacking in the other fields. It is really hard to improve all this stuff at once.)
