6 ms·

Making everyone get through 2 semesters of calculus and a real probability class would help both their well roundedness and employee-ability. The lack of numer

Making everyone get through 2 semesters of calculus and a real probability class would help both their well roundedness and employee-ability. The lack of numeracy and scientific background among otherwise well educated people is shameful.

marklabedz 15y ago
As is the lack of critical thinking, problem solving and communication skills from the other side. EDIT: In response to some of the questions below, please let me clarify. When I said "other side" I was meaning a lack of well-roundedness. I was NOT trying to pit STEM grads against liberal arts grads. I do not intend to state that STEM graduates don't know problem solving or critical thinking. Far from it. However in my experience, those skills are discarded too quickly - similar to how Liberal Arts grads tend to discard even the limited quantitative toolsets they've acquired. (I'll concede its probably not as prevalent among the HN crowd.) Ultimately, its a lack of well-roundedness that limits all camps (I'm sure it would be more accurate to consider more tightly-defined groups than just liberal arts vs engineers.) Ideas are cheap, that's why we laugh at the Wharton posts looking for "code monkeys" every few months. Just as problematic though, is the greatest product but no ability to bring it to market and sustain a viable business.
- quanticle 15y ago
  I am willing to posit that a lack of statistical knowledge does more harm to critical thinking than a lack of rhetorical knowledge.
  - marklabedz 15y ago
    Likely so for critical thinking (Common sense not being so common and all that...). Additionally though, an inability to understand and thoroughly evaluate a problem or articulate its solution, is certainly a challenge as well.
  - _delirium 15y ago
    I'm a stats-heavy computer scientist, but I'd argue the opposite, that the ability to construct and evaluate a rigorous argument is the first thing lacking: one that plausibly analyzes the domain, recounts opposing arguments reasonably fairly, constructs counterarguments that are responsive to the opponents' arguments, and uses logical argumentation along with empirical evidence in a way that actually supports its points. Statistics does fit into that, as one particular species of correctly using empirical evidence. But most freshmen students aren't even constructing coherent arguments in the broad sense; having a technical knowledge of statistical theorems isn't the main bottleneck. This is actually a common problem in my classes: technically-solid students who can't write a coherent essay-length or blog-post-length argument in favor of or against a point. The better students tended to have taken at least a Philosophy 101 course, which taught them how to write a basic "argument for or against a position" paper. Once you have that, there's a pretty good basis on which to expand the argumentation toolbox with statistical arguments.
    - dhume 15y ago
      I'm a stats-heavy computer scientist, but I'd argue the opposite: the ability to construct and evaluate a rigorous argument is the first thing lacking: one that plausibly analyzes the domain, recounts opposing arguments reasonably fairly, constructs counterarguments that are actually responsive to the opponents' arguments, and uses logical argumentation along with empirical evidence in a way that correctly supports its points. This seems closer to "statistics versus logos" than "statistics versus rhetoric."
    - nobody31 15y ago
      So on one side you run a T-test to see if the correlation is significant. On the other side you have the ability to phrase it as a question in the same language as Aristotle.
      - achompas 15y ago
        So on one side you run a T-test to see if the correlation is significant. This is an incredibly gross simplification of applying statistical theory. I suggest you pick up some texts on inference, Bayesian stats, and probability theory to learn how stats != "running t-tests".
  - nekojima 15y ago
    I'd suggest that 9 times out of 8 many STEMs have contextual biases that fail to account for general knowledge that otherwise would strengthen their argumentative position.
    - llimllib 15y ago
      > 9 times out of 8 many STEMs <X> So, 112% of the time 60% of STEMS <X>? What a strange way of phrasing it.
      - nekojima 15y ago
        An attempt at statistical sarcasm/humour.
        llimllib 15y ago
        Stupid lack of internet /sarcasm tags :/
- fiesycal 15y ago
  Are you suggesting an engineering degree or computer science degree etc. don't teach critical thinking and problem solving skills? I'd concede that better communication skills should be taught.
  - jerf 15y ago
    I won't so concede. Schools have been making concerted efforts for a while now to teach engineers better communication skills, and now that I work in a heavy-duty engineering environment it is clearly not the case that every engineer comes out of school a drooling asocial moron. In fact recently some job reqs were going around the company through several of the "communication" oriented people, and it was the engineers correcting the grammar and improving the flow of the text. An unkind impulse suggests that when logic and traditional rhetoric become the domain of "dead prejudiced white guys" you're not looking at the ideal environment for teaching communication skills. The writing of some of my high school acquaintances with English or Journalism degrees blows my mind, and not in a good way.
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  Could you explain what you mean by the terms "critical thinking" and "other side"?
- pandaman 15y ago
  Many people seem to be confused by this statement but I am guessing your liberal arts school taught you that "critical thinking" is what critics do, am I correct?
  - marklabedz 15y ago
    If by critic, you mean from the greek "kritikós" and not some creation of cable news or au courant op-ed pages.
- anamax 15y ago
  > However in my experience, [problem solving or critical thinking] are discarded too quickly - similar to how Liberal Arts grads tend to discard even the limited quantitative toolsets they've acquired. Are you really claiming that Liberal Arts grads don't discard their problem solving and critical thinking? I ask because I don't see them demonstrating either, at least compared to STEM folk. So, either they didn't learn them or they discard them quickly.
mattmanser 15y ago
That's a problem with high school, not university.
- typicalrunt 15y ago
  Agreed. However, there's enough stories in the US and Canada to show that high schools are under-performing. There are lots of opportunities for reforming high school, but let's not jump to teaching kids Calculus II when they have trouble spelling "Calculus" in the first place.
wanorris 15y ago
Making everyone get through 2 semesters of calculus and a real probability class frankly sounds like a great idea for reforming high school. Why they can't take kids through "high school" algebra in middle school and have them ready to take more serious math in high school is a mystery to me. From what I gather, a considerably accelerated math curriculum is common in other countries. Is there any reason other than inertia that we can't do this?
- kabdib 15y ago
  I didn't get calculus until I went to a junior college. I think that JC cost me about $800 for a year -- living with parents helps. After a year at the junior college (which I define by "They had a little IBM mainframe, and punch cards") I was a lot more ready for the Large Cow College (30K students, much beefier mainframe with actual terminals for post-first-year courses). I'm convinced it's calculus that separates us from the lower primate kingdom. We should introduce it as early as we can.
  - re_todd 15y ago
    I don't know why more people don't recommend community/junior colleges. You can cut the price of education almost in half if you start out 2 years at a JC.
    - mahyarm 15y ago
      I think it's better to enroll in a 4 year university, and then take all the classes you can at a local JC and transfer them over. That way you avoid yet another admissions gauntlet and will be checking if things transfer for every class.
    - esrauch 15y ago
      A couple of my friends went to a JC and went on to go to what I will define as "schools with recognizable names but not ivy league"-caliber 4 year schools and ended up getting less than half of their classes accepted as transferred largely due to technicalities. They effectively had to go through 4 years of college anyway, they could have saved just as much by enrolling immediately and taking JC courses over the summers and graduated in 4 years instead of 5-6.

marklabedz 15y ago

As is the lack of critical thinking, problem solving and communication skills from the other side. EDIT: In response to some of the questions below, please let me clarify. When I said "other side" I was meaning a lack of well-roundedness. I was NOT trying to pit STEM grads against liberal arts grads. I do not intend to state that STEM graduates don't know problem solving or critical thinking. Far from it. However in my experience, those skills are discarded too quickly - similar to how Liberal Arts grads tend to discard even the limited quantitative toolsets they've acquired. (I'll concede its probably not as prevalent among the HN crowd.) Ultimately, its a lack of well-roundedness that limits all camps (I'm sure it would be more accurate to consider more tightly-defined groups than just liberal arts vs engineers.) Ideas are cheap, that's why we laugh at the Wharton posts looking for "code monkeys" every few months. Just as problematic though, is the greatest product but no ability to bring it to market and sustain a viable business.

quanticle 15y ago
I am willing to posit that a lack of statistical knowledge does more harm to critical thinking than a lack of rhetorical knowledge.
- marklabedz 15y ago
  Likely so for critical thinking (Common sense not being so common and all that...). Additionally though, an inability to understand and thoroughly evaluate a problem or articulate its solution, is certainly a challenge as well.
- _delirium 15y ago
  I'm a stats-heavy computer scientist, but I'd argue the opposite, that the ability to construct and evaluate a rigorous argument is the first thing lacking: one that plausibly analyzes the domain, recounts opposing arguments reasonably fairly, constructs counterarguments that are responsive to the opponents' arguments, and uses logical argumentation along with empirical evidence in a way that actually supports its points. Statistics does fit into that, as one particular species of correctly using empirical evidence. But most freshmen students aren't even constructing coherent arguments in the broad sense; having a technical knowledge of statistical theorems isn't the main bottleneck. This is actually a common problem in my classes: technically-solid students who can't write a coherent essay-length or blog-post-length argument in favor of or against a point. The better students tended to have taken at least a Philosophy 101 course, which taught them how to write a basic "argument for or against a position" paper. Once you have that, there's a pretty good basis on which to expand the argumentation toolbox with statistical arguments.
  - dhume 15y ago
    I'm a stats-heavy computer scientist, but I'd argue the opposite: the ability to construct and evaluate a rigorous argument is the first thing lacking: one that plausibly analyzes the domain, recounts opposing arguments reasonably fairly, constructs counterarguments that are actually responsive to the opponents' arguments, and uses logical argumentation along with empirical evidence in a way that correctly supports its points. This seems closer to "statistics versus logos" than "statistics versus rhetoric."
  - nobody31 15y ago
    So on one side you run a T-test to see if the correlation is significant. On the other side you have the ability to phrase it as a question in the same language as Aristotle.
    - achompas 15y ago
      So on one side you run a T-test to see if the correlation is significant. This is an incredibly gross simplification of applying statistical theory. I suggest you pick up some texts on inference, Bayesian stats, and probability theory to learn how stats != "running t-tests".
- nekojima 15y ago
  I'd suggest that 9 times out of 8 many STEMs have contextual biases that fail to account for general knowledge that otherwise would strengthen their argumentative position.
  - llimllib 15y ago
    > 9 times out of 8 many STEMs <X> So, 112% of the time 60% of STEMS <X>? What a strange way of phrasing it.
    - nekojima 15y ago
      An attempt at statistical sarcasm/humour.
      - llimllib 15y ago
        Stupid lack of internet /sarcasm tags :/
fiesycal 15y ago
Are you suggesting an engineering degree or computer science degree etc. don't teach critical thinking and problem solving skills? I'd concede that better communication skills should be taught.
- jerf 15y ago
  I won't so concede. Schools have been making concerted efforts for a while now to teach engineers better communication skills, and now that I work in a heavy-duty engineering environment it is clearly not the case that every engineer comes out of school a drooling asocial moron. In fact recently some job reqs were going around the company through several of the "communication" oriented people, and it was the engineers correcting the grammar and improving the flow of the text. An unkind impulse suggests that when logic and traditional rhetoric become the domain of "dead prejudiced white guys" you're not looking at the ideal environment for teaching communication skills. The writing of some of my high school acquaintances with English or Journalism degrees blows my mind, and not in a good way.
yummyfajitas 15y ago
Could you explain what you mean by the terms "critical thinking" and "other side"?
pandaman 15y ago
Many people seem to be confused by this statement but I am guessing your liberal arts school taught you that "critical thinking" is what critics do, am I correct?
- marklabedz 15y ago
  If by critic, you mean from the greek "kritikós" and not some creation of cable news or au courant op-ed pages.
anamax 15y ago
> However in my experience, [problem solving or critical thinking] are discarded too quickly - similar to how Liberal Arts grads tend to discard even the limited quantitative toolsets they've acquired. Are you really claiming that Liberal Arts grads don't discard their problem solving and critical thinking? I ask because I don't see them demonstrating either, at least compared to STEM folk. So, either they didn't learn them or they discard them quickly.

mattmanser 15y ago

That's a problem with high school, not university.

typicalrunt 15y ago
Agreed. However, there's enough stories in the US and Canada to show that high schools are under-performing. There are lots of opportunities for reforming high school, but let's not jump to teaching kids Calculus II when they have trouble spelling "Calculus" in the first place.

wanorris 15y ago

Making everyone get through 2 semesters of calculus and a real probability class frankly sounds like a great idea for reforming high school. Why they can't take kids through "high school" algebra in middle school and have them ready to take more serious math in high school is a mystery to me. From what I gather, a considerably accelerated math curriculum is common in other countries. Is there any reason other than inertia that we can't do this?

kabdib 15y ago
I didn't get calculus until I went to a junior college. I think that JC cost me about $800 for a year -- living with parents helps. After a year at the junior college (which I define by "They had a little IBM mainframe, and punch cards") I was a lot more ready for the Large Cow College (30K students, much beefier mainframe with actual terminals for post-first-year courses). I'm convinced it's calculus that separates us from the lower primate kingdom. We should introduce it as early as we can.
- re_todd 15y ago
  I don't know why more people don't recommend community/junior colleges. You can cut the price of education almost in half if you start out 2 years at a JC.
  - mahyarm 15y ago
    I think it's better to enroll in a 4 year university, and then take all the classes you can at a local JC and transfer them over. That way you avoid yet another admissions gauntlet and will be checking if things transfer for every class.
  - esrauch 15y ago
    A couple of my friends went to a JC and went on to go to what I will define as "schools with recognizable names but not ivy league"-caliber 4 year schools and ended up getting less than half of their classes accepted as transferred largely due to technicalities. They effectively had to go through 4 years of college anyway, they could have saved just as much by enrolling immediately and taking JC courses over the summers and graduated in 4 years instead of 5-6.