3 ms·

I think that I have a reasonable aptitude for maths and I like solving problems, but I always felt like textbook problems more-or-less consisted of plugging the

I think that I have a reasonable aptitude for maths and I like solving problems, but I always felt like textbook problems more-or-less consisted of plugging the numbers into a standard template. Maybe my education was uniquely terrible but I'm surprised that there are people who can blast through textbooks and enjoy doing it.

qzcx 12y ago
I'll agree with you on that. I enjoyed math problems, but only until I grasped the concept. Then it became tedious. I then preferred to move on to more complicated problems. Probably why I like programming, because there is always a more complex program to be made or worked on.
gbog 12y ago
If you know SICP, I think it's a good example of a textbook with nice problems. My math textbook in French education system were to a similar level of quality. The first two problems were usually to make sure you understood the basic of the chapter, but the others were much harder or opened new perspectives, or used very different context. It was a real pleasure to read the textbook and the problems.
- eru 12y ago
  Or try `The Pleasure of Counting'. A mathematical history book. (As the author says, intended for teenagers but not suited for them.)
- zo1 12y ago
  I see you and the OP liked that feature of math problems in the textbooks. I, however, disliked them completely. Here's why: The format is usually on of: you have a chapter with explanation, samples, and rules. Fine and dandy, and then you get to the end of the chapter with a bunch of questions. The questions, usually, start off with simple, menial ones that test your knowledge of the chapter. These are not challenging in any way, they're just gatekeepers to make sure you memorized and can apply what was taught in the chapter. And then, they completely flip it around and make the questions completely different and non-standard. They throw you into the deep end for no reason, without any progression. I wouldn't mind them twisting and slowly warping the questions with more complicated constructs that add new/unique elements, but they hardly ever did that. They instead just threw them all, haphazardly, into the "difficult" questions. Again, I wouldn't mind that if I had some place to look for the answers in that book. Perhaps in an earlier chapter, which would mean that the "hard" problems in subsequent chapters would try combine the concept in the recent chapter with things learnt in older chapters. Sometimes, I really think they don't always spend as much time on those practice/bonus questions as much as they should. We'd very easily get out of the whole "memorize + apply" rut of education, and into "learn, apply and extrapolate", which is where real intelligence/knowledge is.

qzcx 12y ago

I'll agree with you on that. I enjoyed math problems, but only until I grasped the concept. Then it became tedious. I then preferred to move on to more complicated problems. Probably why I like programming, because there is always a more complex program to be made or worked on.

gbog 12y ago

If you know SICP, I think it's a good example of a textbook with nice problems. My math textbook in French education system were to a similar level of quality. The first two problems were usually to make sure you understood the basic of the chapter, but the others were much harder or opened new perspectives, or used very different context. It was a real pleasure to read the textbook and the problems.

eru 12y ago
Or try `The Pleasure of Counting'. A mathematical history book. (As the author says, intended for teenagers but not suited for them.)
zo1 12y ago
I see you and the OP liked that feature of math problems in the textbooks. I, however, disliked them completely. Here's why: The format is usually on of: you have a chapter with explanation, samples, and rules. Fine and dandy, and then you get to the end of the chapter with a bunch of questions. The questions, usually, start off with simple, menial ones that test your knowledge of the chapter. These are not challenging in any way, they're just gatekeepers to make sure you memorized and can apply what was taught in the chapter. And then, they completely flip it around and make the questions completely different and non-standard. They throw you into the deep end for no reason, without any progression. I wouldn't mind them twisting and slowly warping the questions with more complicated constructs that add new/unique elements, but they hardly ever did that. They instead just threw them all, haphazardly, into the "difficult" questions. Again, I wouldn't mind that if I had some place to look for the answers in that book. Perhaps in an earlier chapter, which would mean that the "hard" problems in subsequent chapters would try combine the concept in the recent chapter with things learnt in older chapters. Sometimes, I really think they don't always spend as much time on those practice/bonus questions as much as they should. We'd very easily get out of the whole "memorize + apply" rut of education, and into "learn, apply and extrapolate", which is where real intelligence/knowledge is.