7 ms·

The real tragedy is that pure mathematics is hidden from students for too long and many opt-out of that path in favor of "Actuarial Science" and applied maths.

The real tragedy is that pure mathematics is hidden from students for too long and many opt-out of that path in favor of "Actuarial Science" and applied maths. Real talk: pure maths was way more fun, interesting, and applicable to my life as a software engineer than all the applied math and modelling that I wrote/learned/etc. Pure mathematics expanded my mind unlike any other subject matter.

extr 9y ago
I think you're right that pure math is hidden too long, and with too many "applied" detours along the way. When I was getting my BS in math, I started hearing concepts my junior/senior year that would have done a lot to clear up the motivation and context for lower level classes, even if wouldn't understand them fully until later. Particularly in regards to linear algebra. I did go the Actuarial Science/applied math route in the end, so your comment rings true, but I'm not sure I would characterize it as a bad thing. I wasn't going to be a world-class researcher and the marginal return on a graduate degree in pure math wasn't there. That said, there was a small feeling of "And now the time for fun and games is over" when I stopped studying pure math. I enjoy my job, but math provides a certain satisfaction that business problems do not.
mncharity 9y ago
> The real tragedy is that pure mathematics is hidden from students Physicists make a similar complaint. "Why would anyone want to study physics, when kids are not shown any interesting physics?" Chemistry education research characterizes pre-college chemistry education content as incoherent, leaving both students and teachers confused and deeply steeped in misconceptions. Biology education... starts by deemphasizing it's core organizational principle, and goes downhill from there. > The real tragedy Here's another. "It has been more than a decade since science education research surprised us with how badly science education was failing students. But even now, how often are students told? Instead, K-13, students have been left to think their confusion and cluelessness, are strictly their own fault, their own failing. Left to think science is boring. They are not told that these are known defects of the wretched content we're giving them. Fixing the content is hard. But telling them isn't. At what point does our failing to notify them become an ethical failure?" > pure maths was way more fun, interesting, and applicable to my life [as a software engineer] It can be fun to create ELI5-ish stories about math in everyday life. Math as recognizing patterns. So for instance, moving one way on a "circular" path, you come back around to the same position. As with boardgames, clocks, parking, etc. Missed doing something at lunch today... perhaps try lunch tomorrow. Missed a parking space and can't back up... perhaps drive around the block. Category theory for kids.
- dredmorbius 9y ago
  Could you give counterexamples of good instruction or grounding in these fields: physics, chemistry, biology? Or maybe a clearer description of what constitutes the good and bad approaches? What are the core organising principles, in your view, of biology (and physics and chemistry, if you can state them)? It's an area of general interest to me.
  - empath75 9y ago
    The core organizing principle of biology is evolution and natural selection.
    - dredmorbius 9y ago
      Any roles for metabolism and/or genetics in there?
      - empath75 9y ago
        Sure, but everything is a consequence of natural selection. If you don't teach that, you aren't teaching biology.
        dredmorbius 9y ago
        I'd argue that the set is intrinsically related. Variation. Metabolic efficiency (to expressed effect). Selection. Inheritance (via genetics). Take away any one part, you lose the whole. No variation -- nothing on which to select. No metabolic efficiency (and behavioural effect) -- no criterion for selection or efficiency. No selection -- no bound on behaviour or constraint on metabolic input or expressed behaviour. No inheritence -- any variation or selection lacks survivability to the next generation.
        Infernal 9y ago
        I'm flabbergasted. I just learned more about biology than I have in something like 20 years of state schooling. Genuinely, thank you so much for your comment.

extr 9y ago

I think you're right that pure math is hidden too long, and with too many "applied" detours along the way. When I was getting my BS in math, I started hearing concepts my junior/senior year that would have done a lot to clear up the motivation and context for lower level classes, even if wouldn't understand them fully until later. Particularly in regards to linear algebra. I did go the Actuarial Science/applied math route in the end, so your comment rings true, but I'm not sure I would characterize it as a bad thing. I wasn't going to be a world-class researcher and the marginal return on a graduate degree in pure math wasn't there. That said, there was a small feeling of "And now the time for fun and games is over" when I stopped studying pure math. I enjoy my job, but math provides a certain satisfaction that business problems do not.

mncharity 9y ago

> The real tragedy is that pure mathematics is hidden from students Physicists make a similar complaint. "Why would anyone want to study physics, when kids are not shown any interesting physics?" Chemistry education research characterizes pre-college chemistry education content as incoherent, leaving both students and teachers confused and deeply steeped in misconceptions. Biology education... starts by deemphasizing it's core organizational principle, and goes downhill from there. > The real tragedy Here's another. "It has been more than a decade since science education research surprised us with how badly science education was failing students. But even now, how often are students told? Instead, K-13, students have been left to think their confusion and cluelessness, are strictly their own fault, their own failing. Left to think science is boring. They are not told that these are known defects of the wretched content we're giving them. Fixing the content is hard. But telling them isn't. At what point does our failing to notify them become an ethical failure?" > pure maths was way more fun, interesting, and applicable to my life [as a software engineer] It can be fun to create ELI5-ish stories about math in everyday life. Math as recognizing patterns. So for instance, moving one way on a "circular" path, you come back around to the same position. As with boardgames, clocks, parking, etc. Missed doing something at lunch today... perhaps try lunch tomorrow. Missed a parking space and can't back up... perhaps drive around the block. Category theory for kids.

dredmorbius 9y ago
Could you give counterexamples of good instruction or grounding in these fields: physics, chemistry, biology? Or maybe a clearer description of what constitutes the good and bad approaches? What are the core organising principles, in your view, of biology (and physics and chemistry, if you can state them)? It's an area of general interest to me.
- empath75 9y ago
  The core organizing principle of biology is evolution and natural selection.
  - dredmorbius 9y ago
    Any roles for metabolism and/or genetics in there?
    - empath75 9y ago
      Sure, but everything is a consequence of natural selection. If you don't teach that, you aren't teaching biology.
      - dredmorbius 9y ago
        I'd argue that the set is intrinsically related. Variation. Metabolic efficiency (to expressed effect). Selection. Inheritance (via genetics). Take away any one part, you lose the whole. No variation -- nothing on which to select. No metabolic efficiency (and behavioural effect) -- no criterion for selection or efficiency. No selection -- no bound on behaviour or constraint on metabolic input or expressed behaviour. No inheritence -- any variation or selection lacks survivability to the next generation.
        Infernal 9y ago
        I'm flabbergasted. I just learned more about biology than I have in something like 20 years of state schooling. Genuinely, thank you so much for your comment.