Monday, October 17, 2011
Glen Calder/“How to Fix Our Math Education” Précis
In the New York Times editorial, “How to Fix Our Math Education,” (August 24th 2011) Sol Garfunkle and David Mumford claim that “the highly abstract [math] curriculum is simply not that best way to prepare the vast majority of high school students for life.” Garfunkle and Mumford express their demise for the traditional math topics covered in today’s classrooms, by explaining that “most citizens would be better served by studying how mortgages are priced,” rather than the “sequence of algebra, geometry, more algebra, pre-calculus, and calculus.” The author’s use compelling examples to prove that, if students focused on, “finance, data, and basic engineering,” they would learn beneficial skills for their future, in contrast with the system in place now which only provides students with abstract skills, not usable knowledge. Garfunkle and Mumford address concerned American adults, more specifically, frustrated parents, by defiantly expressing their feelings towards the current math curriculum as it pertains to the average student, and sharing the vitality of their preferred system where math and science are interwoven as they were intended.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author's take on the math curriculum in ours schools because,the math we learn now, which includes algebra and calculus is out dated and not as useful as it could be. The author's make a great point when they explain the advantages of taking classes dealing with finance, data and basic engineering. I believe these classes are more useful to everyone as they prepare for adulthood and in addition, a good understanding of these skills would probably contribute to one's success fiscally so our nation would not face the type of recession we see today.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the authors take on math; most math taught today is applicable to everyday life. You just have to know-how to use it. For example, equations on derivatives in Calculus can be used to solve acceleration problems in Physics and sequence problems from Geometry can be used in interest and financial equations. If professors just taught pupils how to do the daily life problems, then the students wouldn't know where they came from. The Chinese proverb "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime" applies directly here. With a basic knowledge of math, many different daily life situations can be solved; you just have to know how to use the formulas.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the authors' view on math education. Yes, it is important to learn application and application should be taught in schools, but it is more important to know the basics solidly before jumping into applications. If you simply jumped into an engineering job, you would probably eventually learn all the material, but each time a new problem arose, you wouldn't know how to answer the problem with the little bits of knowledge you have; whereas if you are taught the basics to begin with, figuring out the solutions is not too difficult. Why do you think in schools do you always learn how to do word problems after you learn the basics?
ReplyDeleteAs a student who has had his fair share of struggles with math, I find the author's point very interesting. All too often the complaint of, "WHEN will I use this??" comes up in modern-day mathematics classes. While some would argue that one mathematic topic leads to another, many "real world" problems, save job-specific ones, do not require complex, written equations. In fact, I believe that I would be correct in saying that almost all mathematic aspects in day-to-day life are instantaneous subconscious processes, rather than the written equations that students are tasked with in modern classes. As a final verdict, I would say that I agree with the author's point; I think that a more modern, real-world aspect of mathematics should be taught. In an attempt to please both sides of the argument, however, maybe that application and teaching method could be an optional, student choice.
ReplyDelete