4 ms·

It's interesting to see basic math ability also predict nursing success. Here are some previous observations about math ability predicting programming aptitude:

by ivan_ah 10y ago

It's interesting to see basic math ability also predict nursing success. Here are some previous observations about math ability predicting programming aptitude: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8741868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8741868 I wonder what's going on here. Perhaps math ability is just a proxy for "general intelligence," which is useful in all fields? Or simply correlated to the quality of student's schooling prior to arriving at university? Or perhaps it is indicative of character traits like perseverance and self-confidence? As a math author, I can't help but think that unblocking people fear of math could lead to significant improvements in society. It sometimes feel like basic math is a "gatekeeper subject," that decides student's academic outcomes. Can't memorize these stupid facts that are being drilled into you at the age of 10? Then you will never finish college/university! It doesn't need to be this way...

swiley 10y ago
I don't know if it reflects "general intelligence" but rather the ability to just sit down and think/work through something abstract (which is more about patience than inteligence.)
- closeparen 10y ago
  What do you think is abstract about high school math? Solving linear and quadratic equations, converting between forms, factoring, applying trig formulas, applying integral and derivative rules + regurgitating memorized ones, etc. were the most concrete tasks I was given in high school outside of gym class. Just follow the procedure you were taught, and if it doesn't work, you were either misremembering the procedure or sloppy in one of the steps. The things I consider abstract were literary analysis papers, "identify the mystery element based on these lab results" chemistry problem sets, etc. where you had at most some small procedures to string together, not a single given procedure that would solve the whole task.
  - ivan_ah 10y ago
    I guess the "abstraction" the parent refers to is the fact that math isn't connected to any specific domain (e.g. history, chemistry, or bio), but instead it is an all-purpose tool. Also, an equation like a*x+b = c is not something you can touch or otherwise be familiar with from everyday experience. (At first I wanted to reply and say how the procedural math skills you outlined in your comment are not what "real math is like" but then I remembered my high school math classes which consisted of exactly the same topics, taught without much explanations. No wonder everyone hates math...)
HeavenBanned 10y ago
From a comment I made elsewhere re: Mathematics: It's not just that -- introductory Calculus at even community colleges is designed to weed students out instead of emphasizing on teaching and comprehension. With tactics like curves, rushed test-taking, unrelated material on exams, poor lectures, teachers with obscenely varying grading tactics, and a "learn it yourself or die" attitude it's clear that many types of different learners are not given a fair shake. That is to say, many bright students who may be good at Math someday (like Hadamard or Birman or Smale or Hubbard) are unceremoniously kicked out of Math fields because of the sink or swim nature of teaching today either through lack of confidence or simple inability to muster the proper grades that are based off the (often times) whimsy of the teacher/professor. This makes you wonder: how many potential geniuses in Mathematics or other STEM fields are we losing due to darwinian teaching tactics? I suspect many more than we're willing to admit. Let's put it this way: why invest in the infrastructure of teaching core concepts in math, chemistry, biology, physics, etc. to raise everyone to mastery-levels of performance when you can just throw the students to the wolves and see who excels on their own? And I don't believe math is a proxy for "general intelligence" any more than having a big vocabulary (another metric the SAT uses) does. When taught properly, anyone can go from illiterate in math to mastery. And this is just calculus, which is an introductory course in most 4-year institutions. How are going to compete with the rest of the world like this when we're so bad at math when compared to say, Singapore? To put our rank in perspective: we beat Kazhakstan by a hair. Kazhakstan? Seriously, America? The upshot? Most of schooling in course subjects like calculus is sink or swim, with little emphasis on good pedagogy.

by ivan_ah 10y ago

swiley 10y ago

I don't know if it reflects "general intelligence" but rather the ability to just sit down and think/work through something abstract (which is more about patience than inteligence.)

closeparen 10y ago
What do you think is abstract about high school math? Solving linear and quadratic equations, converting between forms, factoring, applying trig formulas, applying integral and derivative rules + regurgitating memorized ones, etc. were the most concrete tasks I was given in high school outside of gym class. Just follow the procedure you were taught, and if it doesn't work, you were either misremembering the procedure or sloppy in one of the steps. The things I consider abstract were literary analysis papers, "identify the mystery element based on these lab results" chemistry problem sets, etc. where you had at most some small procedures to string together, not a single given procedure that would solve the whole task.
- ivan_ah 10y ago
  I guess the "abstraction" the parent refers to is the fact that math isn't connected to any specific domain (e.g. history, chemistry, or bio), but instead it is an all-purpose tool. Also, an equation like a*x+b = c is not something you can touch or otherwise be familiar with from everyday experience. (At first I wanted to reply and say how the procedural math skills you outlined in your comment are not what "real math is like" but then I remembered my high school math classes which consisted of exactly the same topics, taught without much explanations. No wonder everyone hates math...)

HeavenBanned 10y ago

From a comment I made elsewhere re: Mathematics: It's not just that -- introductory Calculus at even community colleges is designed to weed students out instead of emphasizing on teaching and comprehension. With tactics like curves, rushed test-taking, unrelated material on exams, poor lectures, teachers with obscenely varying grading tactics, and a "learn it yourself or die" attitude it's clear that many types of different learners are not given a fair shake. That is to say, many bright students who may be good at Math someday (like Hadamard or Birman or Smale or Hubbard) are unceremoniously kicked out of Math fields because of the sink or swim nature of teaching today either through lack of confidence or simple inability to muster the proper grades that are based off the (often times) whimsy of the teacher/professor. This makes you wonder: how many potential geniuses in Mathematics or other STEM fields are we losing due to darwinian teaching tactics? I suspect many more than we're willing to admit. Let's put it this way: why invest in the infrastructure of teaching core concepts in math, chemistry, biology, physics, etc. to raise everyone to mastery-levels of performance when you can just throw the students to the wolves and see who excels on their own? And I don't believe math is a proxy for "general intelligence" any more than having a big vocabulary (another metric the SAT uses) does. When taught properly, anyone can go from illiterate in math to mastery. And this is just calculus, which is an introductory course in most 4-year institutions. How are going to compete with the rest of the world like this when we're so bad at math when compared to say, Singapore? To put our rank in perspective: we beat Kazhakstan by a hair. Kazhakstan? Seriously, America? The upshot? Most of schooling in course subjects like calculus is sink or swim, with little emphasis on good pedagogy.