This was very interesting to read. Very different perspective, thanks for writing. I have a number of questions/thoughts: 1. With the type of schooling you w

This was very interesting to read. Very different perspective, thanks for writing. I have a number of questions/thoughts: 1. With the type of schooling you went through, how many people actually like math at the end of their schooling? I realize you did, but then again there are people in American schools that also like math. How many, really? 2. How much of that math that everyone has to learn is actually useful for the average person? 3. You say "Forget about the whole, um, personality and uniqueness and whatnots." -- This is basically the approach that has been taken throughout most of history, grounded in the idea that we're all empty cups to be filled. However, the "empty cups to be filled" idea is flawed. It's true that in America people hate to be called the same, enjoy their uniqueness, etc. -- however that idea is more than just a skin-deep preference. Young people are different, have different hobbies, different values, personalities, and have different ways of learning. One can apply one method and ignore all that (ie. your prescription), or another is to realize that differences do exist and structure the learning environment to cater for it. The former is a proven way of producing decent outcomes (though very varied); the latter is in many respects unproven/unsolved, and so I believe has much greater potential. Just as HN'ers pursue innovation through technology (in most cases), the latter pursues innovation with learning outcomes.