English society fails math

[Rye]

Found the article

I think the worst thing is the woman at the counter AGREED she should win.

While it's bad, it's not that bad. You don't have to have any great skill to operate a cash till.

As for leaving school without a maths GCSE, that's pretty atrocious. I got a B in GCSE maths and I was pukingly ill an hour before it started. Had to pull over on the road before I got there.

That hardest thing to do with negative numbers is when you start multiplying them and dividing them because you have to remember to make the answer positive if the numbers you're using are both negative, and make it negative if one of them is positive.

Also, I thought the grading scale for GCSEs was A-E with less than an E being a U?

Anyway, I don't think that the stupid people in the article are representative of the wider community, since maths grades c and above have consistently risen for the last 10 years or so. These two were probably just thick.

Also, there is considerably less chance of Servo paying out >£1 million than a lottery.

[Stuart Mackey]

The notion that it takes "above average intelligence" to grasp the concept negative numbers easily is possibly the most depressing idea I've heard all year. It's a simple concept, even a ten year old could probably get it. And I say that as somebody who whips out the calculator to do 7 X 14: I suck at math.

What would you say about someone who whips out the calculator to do 3 + 4? (true story, mom tutored such a person once)

Learning disabilities? I had to get the calculator for 7x15 and 3+4 I have to think about momentarily, but then I have various disabilities. A lot of problems are quality of teaching, but some are simply kids being lazy.
Mind you I have encountered various science and engineering students who I am pretty sure barely manage to tie their shoelaces of a morning, yet I know they are A grade students.

[Kanastrous]

Intelligence can be very, very highly focused.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Obviously, I was talking about academic punishment, ie- failing grades. It's amazing how lenient school systems are with math skills.

Well that makes sense. I just didn't want to misinterpret you, since the education field is filled with bizarre jargon that don't resemble the real definitions.

I don't think it benefits students to pass them if they don't understand something. The problem extends beyond math, though too. There are many students who rise through the grades who don't have basic phonics or phonemic awareness skills. I think about 50% of the American people read at an 8th grade level only, despite most resources (government documents, websites, etc) being at an 11th grade level. That's nothing to brag about. There's obviously something wrong.

If it helps put the problem in context, in my literacy instruction courses, we are advised not to teach orthography through direct instruction as well as hand-writing.

Then you also have the problem with the extremists of "whole language" vs "phonics." They like to play experimental games with populations of students, fucking over the students in the process.

Another problem is the unreliability of educational research. When I read journals to cull learning strategies for my social studies students, what one researcher says is based on little more than opinion contradicted by yet another researcher. For example, SQ3R strategies: oft promoted, but have very little research on their efficacy. Yet the literature recommends it anyway based apparently on the prestige of it.

[Darth Wong]

Intelligence can be very, very highly focused.

Frankly, I don't really buy that except in freak cases. In most cases, it is not the intelligence which is highly focused; it is the interest. People naturally learn things better when they are interested in them, and some people just have a very narrow range of things they can be interested in learning. You can see this in action when somebody is having a hell of a time learning something, gets a new teacher, and suddenly starts to get it. The new teacher can get them to either relate to the material or spark an enthusiasm, and it's off to the races.

[Metatwaddle]

Ah, the classic tax on people who fail at math. This time it's just a little more blatant than others.

Indeed, I also had elementary school teachers who didn't understand the concept of negative numbers. They might've tried to explain it away later by saying that they didn't want to "confuse" us (which is a bad excuse anyway), but they really, honestly didn't. It went like this:

Teacher: And you can't subtract a bigger number from a smaller number!
Adorably cute seven year old me: Yes you can! Then you get negative numbers.
Teacher: *blank look* What?

Heh, my second grade teacher actually wanted us to know this stuff- she sort of gave us a taste of it at the beginning of the year, just letting us know they were there and briefly explaining what they were. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Our math classes were grouped by ability, though, so it was the top 25% of kids she was talking to.

[Sarevok]

Anyway, I don't think that the stupid people in the article are representative of the wider community, since maths grades c and above have consistently risen for the last 10 years or so. These two were probably just thick.

The exams have gotten far too easy. Anything less than an A is unacceptable now. I do not have statistics at hand but from people I knew at school A was the most common grade. How can everyone be such a math genius ? GCSE maths is full of generic solve this equation or draw this graph type questions that require no thinking if you know the formulas. (they even give the formula sheets anyway). The SAT requires at least some critical thinking and lot of people who did well in A levels do bad in SAT. Since the SAT itself is an easy test that makes GCSE maths seem even more ridiculas.

[PeZook]

The exams have gotten far too easy. Anything less than an A is unacceptable now. I do not have statistics at hand but from people I knew at school A was the most common grade. How can everyone be such a math genius ? GCSE maths is full of generic solve this equation or draw this graph type questions that require no thinking if you know the formulas. (they even give the formula sheets anyway). The SAT requires at least some critical thinking and lot of people who did well in A levels do bad in SAT. Since the SAT itself is an easy test that makes GCSE maths seem even more ridiculas.

To be honest, high-school level maths require little thinking anyways. Most of real-world math problems (like managing your credit) are simple matters of "Ask a question - apply formula - get answer". You don't have to be a "math genius" to get basic algebra, and everybody should be able to understand things like these. It would be good to see some evidence of exams being too easy.

In my class at high school practically everybody got an A in maths, too. Dos this mean the tests were too easy?

Most of these people later survived through the entire master's course at Gdansk Technical University, so I'd guess they just understood the material.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Not to take things away fro mmath... but a work today I spent a good deal of time trying to convince several Co-Workers that Helium is NOT flammible.

[Kanastrous]

Intelligence can be very, very highly focused.

Frankly, I don't really buy that except in freak cases. In most cases, it is not the intelligence which is highly focused; it is the interest. People naturally learn things better when they are interested in them, and some people just have a very narrow range of things they can be interested in learning.You can see this in action when somebody is having a hell of a time learning something, gets a new teacher, and suddenly starts to get it. The new teacher can get them to either relate to the material or spark an enthusiasm, and it's off to the races.

That having been my own experience with JHS/HS math, I guess I'd have to agree that's true.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Not to take things away fro mmath... but a work today I spent a good deal of time trying to convince several Co-Workers that Helium is NOT flammible.

I once had to get two different sources to convince my brother the same side of the moon always faces the earth.

[Kanastrous]

I once had to get two different sources to convince my brother the same side of the moon always faces the earth.

I had to sit down and throw together a little 3D animation to demonstrate tidal lock to someone who just...couldn't...get...it.

Hooray for Lightwave.

[mr friendly guy]

Reminds me of the story posted last year about the telephone company workers who couldn't tell the difference between 0.02 cents and 0.02 dollars.

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

[bilateralrope]

Not to take things away fro mmath... but a work today I spent a good deal of time trying to convince several Co-Workers that Helium is NOT flammible.

I once had to get two different sources to convince my brother the same side of the moon always faces the earth.

Did you ask him why when you look up at the sky you only ever see one side of the moon, and the visible features never move ?

[Spin Echo]

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

Reminds me of a t-shirt the frats used to sell as a fundraiser. "MIT: We're not that smart, you're just that dumb."

I think a lot of us tend to have our ivory towers (not just academia) and forget that a lot of the things we think are obvious and straight-forward aren't to a lot of people.

[Molyneux]

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

If that's "average intelligence", then the human race needs to get smarter.

I'm an idiot a good amount of the time, and I'm miles ahead of that kind of person in intelligence.

[Junghalli]

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

God I hope not. That's one of the most depressing ideas I've ever heard.

[Darth Servo]

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

The average Joe is a moron. Remember, half the population has an IQ below 100.

[sketerpot]

What would you say about someone who whips out the calculator to do 3 + 4? (true story, mom tutored such a person once)

I'd guess that such a person just got used to doing all numerical calculations on a calculator without giving it any thought. That requires slightly less mental effort than having a sense for how numbers work.

Of course, I can't really understand this -- I've been able to come up with mental arithmetic tricks on the fly since I was 6, and it's simply baffling that someone else would not have this simple ability. I suspect that most people here are in a similar situation, and on this topic everyone is blind.

[Darth Wong]

On a slight tangent, we tend to think of these people are stupid. But perhaps its simply that these people are "of average intelligence" and we are just smart?

God I hope not. That's one of the most depressing ideas I've ever heard.

Look at the top-rated shows on TV and then try to tell yourself it's not true.

[Dartzap]

I got an E in my maths GCSE, this was A) because I have a learning condition which means numbers start dancing around the page and hide behind things and B) the support I got from the school was utter crap.

Once I got to college, I managed to get the equivalent of a C in the Key Skills thing, so I'm not as bad as I thought.

That's actually one of the things you notice in college: Most of the people who failed quite badly in their GCSE get picked up and given a secound chance with the Key Skills programme, and they generally do vastly better with the coursework based approache than with exams.

[drachefly]

In seventh grade, I stopped class for twenty minutes because I would not accept that a cubic meter of water weighed 100 kilograms.

I even executed the multiplication on the board in front of everyone, and right past that, the argument continued for the last ten minutes of class -- the teacher and the dumber half of the class on one side, me on the other.

That was a serious WoI, and without even a grand cause. Just... I don't even know.

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Darth Wong wrote:

Look at the top-rated shows on TV and then try to tell yourself it's not true.

I just have an image of Darth Vader saying this to Luke on Cloud City after cutting off his hand.

People are depressingly dumb. But from my tutoring experience, even people who are quite poorly endowed intellectually can be trained to function at a higher degree of competence than what we allow from most people now, if it is seen as desirable. Now changing the culture to make people desire it is quite a task, since we still have to contend with not just laziness, but organized power blocks that feed on spreading ignorance.

I am hopeful that the post Peak Oil shakeup of society might give the brights enough of an opportunity to push in this direction.

[Julhelm]

I think part of the issue is that the academic criteria are lowered because to school management and politicians, having a higher statistical average grade is supposedly better. The result being engineering students who cannot do basic calculus and 1 in 4 students graduating from highschool without being proficient in reading or writing their mother tounge. Back when I was doing the teacher programme at college, the teachers at the highschool I did my internship actually stated they wouldn't disqualify any student at all whatever their results because that'd be "cutting the legs of the students" or some dumbshit reason like that.

[Terralthra]

I think part of the issue is that the academic criteria are lowered because to school management and politicians, having a higher statistical average grade is supposedly better. The result being engineering students who cannot do basic calculus and 1 in 4 students graduating from highschool without being proficient in reading or writing their mother tounge. Back when I was doing the teacher programme at college, the teachers at the highschool I did my internship actually stated they wouldn't disqualify any student at all whatever their results because that'd be "cutting the legs of the students" or some dumbshit reason like that.

That's because the teachers aren't allowed to teach literacy skills. The current teaching method involves "If they have their eyes near the page full of words, A." Testing whether or not they understood the material is basically off-limits, as is having homework that counts towards their final grade and tests on a specific day. Yes, really.

This is why I'm continuing through school to get a post-grad degree and teach at the college level.