Do kids really need math beyond algebra?

[AENeuman]

I think the teaching, content and assessment of math is so far behind the technology available and needed that it would be more beneficial to reduce the high school graduation math requirement to Algebra I (a class that is often taken in 8th grade).

The main benefit of math (and most subjects for that matter) is not the specific content learned, but rather it's learning to learn in a different critical way. I think students can learn the critical thinking skills they would learn from math today in a much more efficient, engaging and successful way; primarily through the use of technology. for example it is much more beneficial to know how to use excel than it is to know how to balance a check book by hand.

Much like students take an intro of biology, chemistry, American literature, wood shop, etc, math should also be approached as an introduction to the field of mathematics. If a student is interested in the subject, they can take more.

We are still trying to teach the style of math that was created in response to sputnik. however, through technology we now have the ability to teach in a far more dynamic, engaging and macro scope.

I think for the vast majority of people (in non-math related fields) in this country having a very good understanding of algebra would provide them with the skills needed to be successful/competent. our technology has created a society where only basic math is required, so why waste the students time teaching them something technology has made obsolete?

[spleen1015]

Who creates the technology to do the math if no one knows how to do the math?

[Alan T]

I don't know how it is these days, but I remember 20 years ago, after Algebra II, we usually had Analysis, Trig and Calculus.

I guess Trig and Calculus could be pretty arguable, but Analysis I really think is necessary and actually very poorly learned from my experience in the work force. In a technical field, I can't begin to explain how much frustration I receive from people not practicing very basic troubleshooting or problem flow analysis such as taught in that basic highschool class.

Everyone now a days in the technical field seem to be about creating scripts for people to follow when doing troubleshooting. That ends up leaving critical out of the box thinking behind. I guess it gives more job security for me, but still bothers me greatly.

So sure, the AP math classes, perhaps could be swapped out with other things I suppose, but I definitely would keep Analysis

[AENeuman]

I guess it gives more job security for me, but still bothers me greatly.


that's my point. much like it is acceptable to be ignorant about our health (alomst no education on this) and rely on doctors to fix us, why can't we embrace our ignorance in math and let you get rich off it? (as we already do to some extent in accounting and using turbo tax to fill out a 1040ez)

[SportsDino]

Yuck, we don't need even stupider sheep in the populace. Excel is a skill that should be taught in a computers class, it isn't math.

Algebra is just the start of people learning how to actually think about math rather than punching buttons on a calculator. Half of the math taught in high school is necessary for basic understanding of chemistry, PHYSICS, and statistics. You might as well cut the curriculum down to reading/writing/history at that point.

Hell, this is the society that thinks everyone needs to go to college, this is impossible with 8th grade level math as the standard leaving high school. We already have a society of the most expensively trained secretaries and coffee shop workers, and we are constantly being passed by on engineering development by other countries.

There is no way cutting back on math is somehow going to improve education. Its just embracing the dumbening of America.

Even more than the mechanical skills, what this really gets to is learning how to think mathematically instead of arithmetically. The process of proofs is why we teach geometry, not because anyone really cares about the circumference of a circle most days. The problem with a lot of people is they can't connect the dots in their thinking, they think all of discourse and intelligence is quoting back the latest groupthink blasted out over the television. We need less frickin zombies and more people who are able to systematically approach problems and solve them.

You want 'deeper algebra'... guess what, that is what most of those classes after algebra 1 are doing. You take the skills learned in algebra, and apply them to real world math problems like geometry and trigonometry to get people some practice, otherwise they don't have the basic intelligence to understand whether the MatLab equation solver they used actually got the right result or not because they typoed the entry.

This is the same as engineers downplaying the liberal arts, they think as long as they can do math that they'll never have need to communicate with someone else, or understand how history and social science help to understand the context and the process of what people are doing all around them. It is just an extension of the 'people are mindless cogs in a giant machine' type of thinking, they put it under the friendly name of 'specialization' but its really just making kids braindead and minimally functional to live the dumb consumer lifestyle.

[TCY Junkie]

Too many people already don't know basic math.

[Alan T]

This is the same as engineers downplaying the liberal arts, they think as long as they can do math that they'll never have need to communicate with someone else, or understand how history and social science help to understand the context and the process of what people are doing all around them. It is just an extension of the 'people are mindless cogs in a giant machine' type of thinking, they put it under the friendly name of 'specialization' but its really just making kids braindead and minimally functional to live the dumb consumer lifestyle.


Funny you mention this. I am an engineer, and with spell checkers and grammar checkers so easily available these days I ask myself all of the time why so much grammar or literature is needed. Then I read posts online from random people and can barely understand what they are saying, or attempting to say. I suddenly realize removing those classes would not be too smart.

[JediKooter]

As much as I hate math, I think it's critical that kids learn math beyond algebra.

[cartman]

Too many people already don't know basic math.

70% of the board probably agrees with you. The other half disagrees.

[SportsDino]

that's my point. much like it is acceptable to be ignorant about our health (alomst no education on this) and rely on doctors to fix us, why can't we embrace our ignorance in math and let you get rich off it? (as we already do to some extent in accounting and using turbo tax to fill out a 1040ez)

During my schooling there was a mandatory health class, the teacher doing it was a dumbass who just sat around like a piece of lard, but in theory it teaches you basics of nutrition, exercise, etc. We rely on doctors to fix us because it really is a specialty to cut someone with a scalpel and have them actually improve in health. Most of us trying to do that just make a mess...

The idea is learning how to actually solve problems. Necessary for a doctor, an engineer, or a retail worker who wants to actually be a manager some day. Its not the fault of people who have intelligence to explain to the average moron that solving a math problem is much like solving any other problem... the average moron just wants to learn the same as a dog, through repetition and observation, but without understanding.

We need less of those.

[Antmeister]

70% of the board probably agrees with you. The other half disagrees.

LOL! Awesome.

[JonInMiddleGA]

the average moron just wants to learn the same as a dog, through repetition and observation, but without understanding. We need less of those.

Somewhere in that snippet I think you said something very useful, but I'm not completely sure how to isolate it properly.

I don't think the problem is actually what the "average moron" wants, the problem actually lies with how close to moron "average" has become.

Moron, under the old definitions no longer in use was "A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education."

[TCY Junkie]

70% of the board probably agrees with you. The other half disagrees.

I usually go for that 1 percent. You know, odds are you buy three packs of cards and you get a gold foil card. When you open that last pack you're thinking it's gotta a be this pack, but it isn't. Sometimes no one understands.

[SportsDino]

No offense intended towards people with learning disabilities, I went with moron instead of a dumbfuck, please read it as whatever you find most insulting to the average person, but not insulting to people of the class I unintentionally insulted.

This is where those extra grammar and communication classes would have helped me.

The point was to distinguish between rote learning versus reasoning. In an extreme rote-learning world a person would only understand those things that they have seen before and through repeated personal experience know the answers to any problem that might arise.

A person with reasoning can apply assumptions to situations they have not encountered before and can arrive at the same solutions without exhaustive personal experience. They can also manipulate these sets of assumptions to come up with new assumptions that are logically consistent with the set, so they can project their knowledge to situations that they have not even encountered yet.

Higher math teaches people to think at a level where rote-learning becomes less and less practical. You cannot memorize every possible long division, so you learn the process of dividing the problem into a subset that is solvable. You learn to prove something so you can solve entire classes of problems without having to perform a manual test on all inputs (I deal with problems that are too large to test all possibilities, so if I didn't use mathematical processes to verify my work I'd be out of luck).

[Young Drachma]

Yes without question. Whether the methods of teaching it need to change is a completely different question, but it's already taken too far a backseat in favor of high stakes testing and other superfluous things that hamper them later in life.

Start early and often.

[Pumpy Tudors]

We need more math. I took one freshman-level trig class in college, and that's the only math I studied that was more advanced than algebra. Look how I turned out.

[Galaxy]

Teach more accounting and money management (not in a pure business sense, but for everyday use) classes.

[markprior22]

Teach more accounting and money management (not in a pure business sense, but for everyday use) classes.

BIG +1

[Marc Vaughan]

Teach more accounting and money management (not in a pure business sense, but for everyday use) classes.
I agree with this - I'm a big advocate of education however I also think a lot more 'practical' stuff like this should be taught, along with teaching people to break out of the 'employee' mindset and showing them that its possible to setup your own businesses etc.

One of the most influential classes for me at school was home economics (cooking) - we had to buy our own ingredients and were taught to cook, I chose to make things which I knew I could sell to other people at school.

I made more from that lesson than I generally did in pocket money each week; that experience encouraged me to branch out and try things in life which I might not have otherwise ... even outside of my career such experiences gave me the bravery to simply 'try new things' which has lead me into many great experiences including my present home here in Florida.

[JonInMiddleGA]

No offense intended towards people with learning disabilities, I went with moron instead of a dumbfuck, please read it as whatever you find most insulting to the average person, but not insulting to people of the class I unintentionally insulted.

FWIW, since I have no idea whether this was clear or not, my comment wasn't meant as critical of your word choice, I added the old definition strictly to help illustrate the point I was trying to make.

Regardless of the terminology used, my point was that I believe you're probably giving credit for too high a percentage of the population being capable of gaining the benefits you described in your follow up post. (i.e. They can also manipulate these sets of assumptions to come up with new assumptions that are logically consistent with the set, etc ... Higher math teaches people to think at a level where rote-learning becomes less and less practical, etc

Oddly enough, I struggled mightily with even HS algebra (personality conflict with teacher mostly) but am actually one of those people who will say without hesitation that I've used it for most of my adult life, not the concepts in some basic way but actual algebra itself.

[BrianD]

Learning the technology without the math is nearly pointless. I've seen a lot of people who work with Excel all day do a piss-poor job because they don't really understand the math behind what they are trying to figure out. My knowledge of Excel is only mediocre, but I can run circles around these people because I know the math.

[DanGarion]

To answer the original question.


Yes.

[panerd]

I think a lot of you are missing the point of the thread. He isn't saying to discourage anyone from pursuing higher math and the sciences he is just saying that it is dumb to require them to go past algebra if they already have no idea of what is going on. I have taught geometry (the course after algebra in our district) and none of the seniors or juniors have any idea of what is going on. The freshmen do and that is why we should encourage them to go forward but why make the seniors keep trying to get that extra credit?

EDIT: And there are a ton of jobs (like it or not it is where this country is at) that require no use of any math beyond algebra.

[BrianD]

But I thought that everybody had an equal chance to be anything they want when they grow up. Are we willing to close some of those doors for kids in high school? Personally I would be willing to, but many parents wouldn't.

[ace1914]

EDIT: And there are a ton of jobs (like it or not it is where this country is at) that require no use of any math beyond algebra.


Don't you think that's a big issue?

[panerd]

But I thought that everybody had an equal chance to be anything they want when they grow up. Are we willing to close some of those doors for kids in high school? Personally I would be willing to, but many parents wouldn't.

But isn't the parent's problem. They can still sign their kids up for whatever classes they want. Who cares what other people's kids will or won't take? Can't we expect at least that level of interest from parents on their kids education? Enrolling your kids in classes!?!

[panerd]

Don't you think that's a big issue?

Sure but the algebra II requirement is not changing that at all. The country is this way with the requirement. Do you really think those kids that got D-'s their third time taking Algebra II are better off than had they taken 3 classes in a discipline other than math?

[AENeuman]

I have taught geometry (the course after algebra in our district) and none of the seniors or juniors have any idea of what is going on.

God bless you. every math teacher i have meet/worked with all said senior geometry is the hardest, most frustrating class to teach.

[AENeuman]

The problem with a lot of people is they can't connect the dots in their thinking, they think all of discourse and intelligence is quoting back the latest groupthink blasted out over the television. We need less frickin zombies and more people who are able to systematically approach problems and solve them.

I think all post should start with this...;)

we agree that things right now are not good. i purpose a radical change, you want more of the same, just harder (and maybe without cable)

[RainMaker]

I think math is taught poorly in schools these days but it's absolutely necessary. Math is a part of everything and teaches critical thinking and problem solving.

[dawgfan]

For those that talk about how important math is in developing critical thinking, I agree. For those that talk about emphasizing practical application learning, I also agree. And my solution to both is this - we need to start placing a much greater emphasis on teaching probability and statistics. Too many people have really distorted ideas of probability, and it affects their thinking on a scale far beyond just math.

I took all the math classes in High School up through and including calculus. When I got to college, I realized I was not headed in a path that required more advanced math, so I satisfied my "quantitative reasoning" requirement by taking a statistics and probability class, and it was easily the best math related class I've ever had - the implications and resulting knowledge gained from that class have had a far greater impact on my life than trig or calculus.

[Fidatelo]

I don't really care how much math we teach, I just want to know if that fucking train cruising at 70mph was able to stop in time.

[SportsDino]

I disagree with any radical change that amounts to 'well lets not do anything beyond the most basic algebra'. If you want to make a standard non-college trade-school track through high school I would be behind that if we pushed as a society for not using degrees as a sledgehammer to people's futures in employment.

We already have the most expensive secretaries in the world (college degrees are common 'preferences' for low paying office drones). I am opposed to anything that involves people delaying learning to college where it is much more expensive to EVERYONE involved (student, school, national funding). Inevitably a bunch of students are going to sign up for this 'easy street' and then change their mind and decide they have to go to college. All you've done is clubbed their knee caps and gave them a bill for thousands of dollars to catch up in the race.

Hell, not everyone can be Jeff Gordon, but you have your way and we'll see even more people who can't keep up with the pace car!

I probably overestimate what people are capable of, I think most people choose and embrace ignorance, rather than being fundamentally weak in the head in some way from birth or upbringing. We need less molly-coddling and laziness, and more people determined and capable to be builders instead of consumers. Anyone who says only a portion of the people need to be the brains is the same person that will keep your salary low the rest of your life and then say when you lose your job 'well if you had any skills and education you wouldn't be in this position'. If life is going to be harsh, at least start early enough that people can prepare for it, instead of being dependent on federal charity.

[cartman]

I don't really care how much math we teach, I just want to know if that fucking train cruising at 70mph was able to stop in time.

but what is that is kph?

[lighthousekeeper]

One of the most influential classes for me at school was home economics (cooking) - we had to buy our own ingredients and were taught to cook, I chose to make things which I knew I could sell to other people at school.


...and thus started Marc's short-lived yet highly lucrative 5th grade Meth business.

[QuikSand]

The main benefit of math (and most subjects for that matter) is not the specific content learned, but rather it's learning to learn in a different critical way.

This is not a universally agreed-upon assessment, of course. There are different theories about what the teaching/learning process really seeks to provide to the learner... some combination of information and skills, but that split is not really a matter of consensus.

One thing that seems to be the case (also controversial) is that mathematics is pretty close to a brute force learning area for most people. Many do not exit their math instruction with a set of learning skills or a framework for how to think about things differently -- they instead just emerge with enough things memorized to be able to pass an examination, and then dump the large share of it. So, with the "sheep," what do you truly gain by forcing more math? Are you instilling discipline in study that will pay off in non-mathematical ways? Maybe. Are you teaching a way to think about things that will prove useful later in life? We'd hope so, but perhaps not.

I do think there's an element of moralism here that's not to be trifled with. To at some point just say we don't care whether the great unwashed get exposure to certain academic things (yes, even by sort of forcing it upon them through public policy) really does resonate with me as a pretty evil thing to do. Not that this argument ought to win the day, just seems pretty cold to declare a loss that way.

[Noop]

Teach more accounting and money management (not in a pure business sense, but for everyday use) classes.

I fucking agree wholeheartedly.

[Glengoyne]

Gotta have Geometry. It is just too useful in life, calculating areas and such.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Gotta have Geometry. It is just too useful in life, calculating areas and such.

Of course, I mean, not a day goes by where I don't have to that several times.

[Glengoyne]

Of course, I mean, not a day goes by where I don't have to that several times.


Hey, annually for me at least. But it is more satisfying to know how to figure out how long the third leg of a triangle is than to be ignorant of simple facts.

[gstelmack]

Of course, I mean, not a day goes by where I don't have to that several times.

Heck, I do it near daily :D

It's always fun to get asked "what classes should I take to be a game programmer?" They're expecting answers like C, C++, graphics, and always flip out when I say Calculus, Physics, Data Structures, Algorithms. Everything I do is in 3D, and so understanding vectors, trig, and the like is CRITICAL.

But more on to the topic at hand, I agree with the earlier statement that our society is so focused on the degree and the college education as the way to advancement that the advanced classes are needed. But if we had some different career tracks like bringing back vocational, we could tailor high school education much more directly. Honestly by the time you leave the 8th grade you ought to know how to count money and make change and have the other basic life skills, and 9th or 10th grade ought to start focusing on college prep or vocational or maybe even "office skills" that don't need a degree but do need some other skillsets.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Hey, annually for me at least. But it is more satisfying to know how to figure out how long the third leg of a triangle is than to be ignorant of simple facts.

{shrug} I guess I can't really speak to the satisfaction of it since, off hand, I can't say that I've ever needed to figure that out, at least not since HS.

Hindsight being what it is, I can definitely say there were a boatload of things my time would have been better spent learning with the same hours I spent on HS geometry (the aforementioned stats/probability class, which my HS didn't even offer, among them).

While I'm posting anyway, just on the basic theme at hand, I probably ought to say that I'm not a big fan of "offering material just for the sake of offering it" at the expense of teaching skills that can actually be applied in the workplace. I believe we ought to do a better job of assessing students & the likelihood that they will have some practical application for a given niche of a subject, and I agree with those who have cited the notion of (for example) secretaries needing 4 yrs of college as being a part of the current problem.

[OldGiants]

We need to do away with technology in the classroom at the younger levels. Too many children don't know basic arithmetic like the times tables. Often their IEPs (Individual Education Plans) allow them to use calculators or cheat sheets. Yes, you have to memorize the tables, that's the point. No one has enough fingers or the time to count it all out. Memorize.

At the HS level, the math teachers I know all complain that today's kids won't accept that they got a problem wrong.

"But I set it up correctly! Don't I get partial credit?"

"There is a correct answer and you didn't get that, so no."

The issue is that at the HS level, math is concrete and has correct answers. The other wussy subjects allow options to be correct, and kids expect that in math. They (and their parents) grow truculent when a Fascist Math Teacher expects the kid to give the correct answer.

There is nothing sadder (or more frustrating) than to try to complete a purchase at a store where there is a power failure and the check-out clerk has to add up the prices, calculate the tax and make change (since the credit cards won't work).

May as well pay with sheep or pigs.

[ace1914]

Why on Earth would you want a basic educational standard to be stagnant, or even worse regress, while technology is advancing? If there are verifiable advancements in technology of our society, the education system should make those advancements the minimum standard for education. That's how you'll get more advancement.


That means Algebra I should be taught earlier, not later.

[JonInMiddleGA]

We need to do away with technology in the classroom at the younger levels.

I'd have to disagree, at this point in society something like keyboarding skills are actually more relevant down the road than just about anything past being able to read.

[AENeuman]

The other wussy subjects allow options to be correct, and kids expect that in math.

That's true. For example, I ask:

What happened on June 6, 1944?
A. A-Day
B. B-Day
C. C-Day
D. D-Day
E. All of the above

;)

[JonInMiddleGA]

That means Algebra I should be taught earlier, not later.

At the expense of what?

I'm not arguing your contention necessarily, but realistically there are only so many hours in the day, something has to give somewhere and recess/PE are already gone in a lot of places and lunches are as short as 15 minutes, so at some point you either have to try to go even further mile wide/inch deep or something has to be dropped.

[gstelmack]

We need to do away with technology in the classroom at the younger levels. Too many children don't know basic arithmetic like the times tables. Often their IEPs (Individual Education Plans) allow them to use calculators or cheat sheets. Yes, you have to memorize the tables, that's the point. No one has enough fingers or the time to count it all out. Memorize.

I'll be taking my 1st grade daughter to Indianapolis late next week for the National Math Bee. This uses a program called "Batter Up!" that is essentially flash cards on the computer disguised as a baseball game. This technology makes it fun for the kids to learn those basic tables. It doesn't remove the need to memorize, but helps improve their ability and desire to learn the skills. They also are doing distance-learning projects with other schools across the country using netbooks and the Internet, plus she has learned what Google is thanks to computers in the classroom.

The key is to use technology to enhance the learning experience and expose them to the tech at a young level so they are comfortable with it. It should never be used to replace those basic skills, that I agree with strongly. As my daughter gets into double-digit addition, she's starting to understand that the early memorization can teach her tricks to solving the more difficult problems, and she's starting to "get" it.

[gstelmack]

At the expense of what?

Nothing? It's more that math moves slowly, and maybe we can compress the math curriculum. Of course I'm someone that blew through 7th grade math, 8th grade math, and partway into 9th grade geometry during my 7th grade years, so I'm a bit biased :D

I am a huge fan of allowing kids to "work ahead". I had several classes like that growing up and they were all that kept me from being bored.

Or they could teach it in place of all the art and music classes they keep kicking out of schools thanks to budget cuts (reason #325,231,768 that my children are in a private school...)

[AENeuman]

At the expense of what?

the 4.5 hours of TV kids watch per day?

[gstelmack]

the 4.5 hours of TV kids watch per day?

Oh please. My kids get up at 6:30 AM, we all get dressed, get breakfast, and get out the door, we pick them up from school between 5:30 and 6:00, get home, eat dinner, get them baths, and get them to bed. If they are lucky they have 15 minutes in the morning to do what they want, and maybe an hour in the evening that is sometmes play (we all went for a family bike ride last night), sometimes TV, sometimes computer.

They may do too much watching on the weekends (although we've got a system set up that has it under control), but it is unlikely they have time for much more schoolwork.

[AENeuman]

Oh please. .
You are right. Your anecdotal evidence proves that stat wrong.

the way i read that stat your parenting is the exception, not the rule

[JonInMiddleGA]

Oh please. My kids get up at 6:30 AM, we all get dressed, get breakfast, and get out the door, we pick them up from school between 5:30 and 6:00, get home, eat dinner, get them baths, and get them to bed. If they are lucky they have 15 minutes in the morning to do what they want, and maybe an hour in the evening that is sometmes play (we all went for a family bike ride last night), sometimes TV, sometimes computer.

They may do too much watching on the weekends (although we've got a system set up that has it under control), but it is unlikely they have time for much more schoolwork.

Thank you, saved me most of the fucking trouble.

I'm already dealing with an average of 3 hours of homework+studying per night (with a 6th grader) as it is, not counting the 40-60 minute after school study sessions 3-4 days a week. And while his curriculum is well ahead of the state public schools in most disciplines (about 1-2 years best I can figure), it starts the basics of algebra in the 4th/5th grade already, and pretty much every public school (yes, even in Georgia) seems to be starting for capable students by at least the 7th as I can tell.

Meanwhile, you can lengthen school day, you can move algebra to pre-k, but that isn't going to change the amount of TV the average kid watches. All that is going to change for the overwhelmingly majority of kids is the content of the homework they aren't doing & provide parents with a couple of more hours of government funded daycare.

[lordscarlet]

So we should dumb down the curriculum so that we can aid the parents that are dumming down their kids? (I'm only half reading this thread, so JIMGA may not be on that side of the fence, but reading JIMGA and Greg's posts made me realize that's ultimately what is happening)

[gstelmack]

So we should dumb down the curriculum so that we can aid the parents that are dumming down their kids? (I'm only half reading this thread, so JIMGA may not be on that side of the fence, but reading JIMGA and Greg's posts made me realize that's ultimately what is happening)

The public schools have been dumbing down the kids for a while. I feel very strongly that we can make more effective use of the time the kids are already in school, not that we have to extend the day a single notch.

The "4.5 hours per day kids watch TV" has ZERO to do with the kind of schooling they receive at the school itself and is a stupid stat to pull out here. Sure the parents may be dimwits that do this, but to say we could eat into that time to do more teaching is absurd. We've already lengthened the school year, put mandatory minimum days kids go to school, and test scores still fall and the schools still pass kids that are WAY below grade level, so none of it is helping.

Teach algebra sooner, not tack it on as an extra class hour during the school day.

[JonInMiddleGA]

So we should dumb down the curriculum so that we can aid the parents that are dumming down their kids? (I'm only half reading this thread, so JIMGA may not be on that side of the fence, but reading JIMGA and Greg's posts made me realize that's ultimately what is happening)

First, I gotta ask: did you intentionally spell "dumming" that way? :D

Otherwise, that's probably overstating it for me by a pretty good margin.

I'd say trying to turn it up several notches across the board (by moving algebra several years earlier than it already is) would accomplish very little.

As usual, my opinions are likely influenced by the public schools that surround me.

Here's a link (http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/DMGetDocument.aspx/Content%20Descriptors%20Math%20Grade%201-8%20August%2019,%202009.pdf?p=6CC6799F8C1371F63FD4A1D950826FBB4D0F1F28D1D3AFF233CB1B89645D975D&Type=D)to the current requirements for grades 1-8 in math in Georgia

The most basic fundamental principles of algebra (such as symbols representing unknown numbers) begin by 3rd grade. By grade five, it's solving by substitution, by grade 6 it's solving one-step equations.

Yet, as simple as that sounds, we've yet to reach even 20% "exceeding standards" in grade 6, have between 25-38% every year "does not meet standards". As soon as "solving" appears in the standards, the exceeds rate drops by half (as high as 36% in earlier grades).

That gives me a pretty good indication of how successful trying to move algebra earlier in the curriculum is going to be with the majority of students (as our statewide public enrollment dwarfs our statewide private enrollment).

You can present it whenever, but that's not likely to have a lot of impact beyond having a lot more students who are completely lost in math (and we don't exactly have a shortage of those already).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Teach algebra sooner, not tack it on as an extra class hour during the school day.

Takes me back to my point though, there's a difference between presenting it and having students able to learn it.

We've got a shortage of students who know what to do with "c", "a", and "t" in words, wtf makes anyone think they'd know what to do with them as numbers?

As I mentioned (which I hadn't posted before your comment), they already start seeing it in 3rd grade even in the backasswards clusterfuck that are Georgia schools, how much earlier can it really go?

Also as I mentioned, my son's class is roughly 1-2 years ahead of the state norm already. And while I didn't see even basic algebra until the 8th grade (circa 1980) he's seen basic algebra for several years already. But that has come at the expense of things that I had much earlier (such as understanding the relationship between fractions & division; a/b = a divided by b) not coming until the past year or even not fully yet at all.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Takes me back to my point though, there's a difference between presenting it and having students able to learn it.

We've got a shortage of students who know what to do with "c", "a", and "t" in words, wtf makes anyone think they'd know what to do with them as numbers?
In all seriousness, I think this is written brilliantly, and I agree with it.

[gstelmack]

Takes me back to my point though, there's a difference between presenting it and having students able to learn it.

We've got a shortage of students who know what to do with "c", "a", and "t" in words, wtf makes anyone think they'd know what to do with them as numbers?

As I mentioned (which I hadn't posted before your comment), they already start seeing it in 3rd grade even in the backasswards clusterfuck that are Georgia schools, how much earlier can it really go?

Also as I mentioned, my son's class is roughly 1-2 years ahead of the state norm already. And while I didn't see even basic algebra until the 8th grade (circa 1980) he's seen basic algebra for several years already. But that has come at the expense of things that I had much earlier (such as understanding the relationship between fractions & division; a/b = a divided by b) not coming until the past year or even not fully yet at all.

I did not realise they'd already advanced the curriculum (I hit it in around 7th grade in the early 80s as I remember). As far as the rest of it, I agree wholeheartedly that they aren't really worried about TEACHING it, at least beyond what it takes to pass the standardized tests. And even those some teachers and admins have been cheating on to keep pushing kids ahead.

[SteveMax58]

I am a huge fan of allowing kids to "work ahead". I had several classes like that growing up and they were all that kept me from being bored.


This is a more interesting concept to me.

[JonInMiddleGA]

In all seriousness, I think this is written brilliantly, and I agree with it.

Well thanks Pumpy, I appreciate that. I've always loved the old quote about Terry Bradshaw & it inspired me in this thread.

[lordscarlet]

The public schools have been dumbing down the kids for a while. I feel very strongly that we can make more effective use of the time the kids are already in school, not that we have to extend the day a single notch.

The "4.5 hours per day kids watch TV" has ZERO to do with the kind of schooling they receive at the school itself and is a stupid stat to pull out here. Sure the parents may be dimwits that do this, but to say we could eat into that time to do more teaching is absurd. We've already lengthened the school year, put mandatory minimum days kids go to school, and test scores still fall and the schools still pass kids that are WAY below grade level, so none of it is helping.

Teach algebra sooner, not tack it on as an extra class hour during the school day.

I'm pretty sure we're on the same page here. The answer is not to dumb down the curriculum.

First, I gotta ask: did you intentionally spell "dumming" that way? :D


It's funny you should ask. I thought it didn't look right. I even got the "red squiggly" in Google Chrome, but it had no suggestion so I figured "dummy/dumby" was not a real word and just moved on. I just looked it up on dictionary.com and while Random House entry does not list it as a form of "dumb", the American Heritage entry does. :)


Otherwise, that's probably overstating it for me by a pretty good margin.

I'd say trying to turn it up several notches across the board (by moving algebra several years earlier than it already is) would accomplish very little.

As usual, my opinions are likely influenced by the public schools that surround me.

Here's a link (http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/DMGetDocument.aspx/Content%20Descriptors%20Math%20Grade%201-8%20August%2019,%202009.pdf?p=6CC6799F8C1371F63FD4A1D950826FBB4D0F1F28D1D3AFF233CB1B89645D975D&Type=D)to the current requirements for grades 1-8 in math in Georgia

The most basic fundamental principles of algebra (such as symbols representing unknown numbers) begin by 3rd grade. By grade five, it's solving by substitution, by grade 6 it's solving one-step equations.

Yet, as simple as that sounds, we've yet to reach even 20% "exceeding standards" in grade 6, have between 25-38% every year "does not meet standards". As soon as "solving" appears in the standards, the exceeds rate drops by half (as high as 36% in earlier grades).

That gives me a pretty good indication of how successful trying to move algebra earlier in the curriculum is going to be with the majority of students (as our statewide public enrollment dwarfs our statewide private enrollment).

You can present it whenever, but that's not likely to have a lot of impact beyond having a lot more students who are completely lost in math (and we don't exactly have a shortage of those already).

I'm not sure when the argument became that it needs to be earlier -- maybe that is just a tangent started by Greg. I apologize if I'm just the asshole that refuses to read every post. But in regards to reducing the math requirements, as the original question stated, I think it's definitely going in the wrong direction. Unless the failure rate has been steady since the current standards existed, why lower them? If it's just a byproduct of a poor education system and the reduction of responsibility by many parents, then I don't think reducing the requirements is the correct answer.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm not sure when the argument became that it needs to be earlier -- maybe that is just a tangent started by Greg. I apologize if I'm just the asshole that refuses to read every post.


That tangent came in somewhere up the thread (ace mentioned it around pg 3, give or take your posts-per-page setting) & I thought it was kind of where you came in so I ran from there. Could have been reading comprehension failure and/or errant post combining on my part.

as the original question stated, I think it's definitely going in the wrong direction. Unless the failure rate has been steady since the current standards existed, why lower them? If it's just a byproduct of a poor education system and the reduction of responsibility by many parents, then I don't think reducing the requirements is the correct answer.

On the original question though, I believe the focus was indeed mostly about the utility of math beyond algebra for the masses period. On that I really do tend to agree with the original premise (i.e. that Algebra I should be the maximum min. required math course) that going beyond that is largely a waste for the majority of students & that time could probably be better spent elsewhere. Thing is, I really don't know how much further than that actual "requirements" go from one state to the next.

Going back to the specific Georgia examples I used earlier, here's the thing:
The actual state HS graduation requirement (math-wise) is to have 4 credits in mathematics, pass any required EOCT's for classes taken, and pass the mathematics section of the graduation test.

Looking at a more detailed course catalog from Gwinnett County, I find:
-- All 9th graders are required to take Algebra I & pass a state EOCT (end of course test)
-- All 10th graders are required to take Integrated Geometry* and pass an EOCT (* or equivalent course, name could vary I think)

From there, it gets kind of fuzzy, there are options starting as early as 9th grade that let you work at a higher pace & basically combine more than a year of material into a single year (the requirements above + more) preparing you for (as well as leaving room in your schedule for) things like AP Calculus toward the end of your HS career. Or you could take the standard track starting with those two above and then go Algebra II in 11th, with half-year courses in Stats/Discrete Mathematics in your senior year.

Now here's where it gets even more confusing. That's the Gwinnet County version, one of the state's largest, most affluent, and highest student achievement areas & what I described is their minimum standards. Thing is, they're higher than the newest version than the state has issued. The state requires the newly named Math I, which integrates a combination of Algebra I, Geometry, some Algebra II, and some Statistics.. The required follow up is Math II, which follows the same Chinese Menu approach, giving a little bit of each. Math III is described as Advanced Algebra/Statistics (but from the more detailed descriptions, looks like 80-90% of it is what I had under the name "Algebra II") and then Math IV is Pre-Calc/Trig/Adv. Stats. And those appear to be the actual "required" courses.

My concern would be about the practical benefit of requiring, say, Trig to masses of students in a country where roughly half the jobs are in sectors such as health care/public assistance + retail + accomodations/food svc + government, and yet in spite of all the seemingly lofty requirements it's still hard to find people in those jobs who can make change without using the register to do it for them. Either there's some sort of disconnect between what is being learned & what is being presented or else we're in such a rush to present these higher concepts that we forget (or intentionally ignore shortcomings in) things like "how to count money of less than $1". Or more likely, both of those things occur.

[Mac Howard]

For those that talk about how important math is in developing critical thinking, I agree. For those that talk about emphasizing practical application learning, I also agree. And my solution to both is this - we need to start placing a much greater emphasis on teaching probability and statistics. Too many people have really distorted ideas of probability, and it affects their thinking on a scale far beyond just math.

I'm surprised that no one has commented on your post because if there's one area in which the mainstream public have an abject inability to handle, that is crucial to our ability to understand processes in society, it is probability and statistics. Much debate is consequently reduced to the binary as a result.

If maths education is to prepare students for later life then a basic understanding of probability and statistics is not only essential but may well help to remove many of the antagonisms in society.

[dawgfan]

If maths education is to prepare students for later life then a basic understanding of probability and statistics is not only essential but may well help to remove many of the antagomisms in society.
Completely agree. I'm a firm believer this kind of math should be mandatory teaching for all high school students.

[Celeval]

the schools still pass kids that are WAY below grade level, so none of it is helping.

Regardless of anything else, it seems to me that this is the root problem.

[Passacaglia]

Can we take this question to other subjects as well? We can even argue if I've framed the questions in the right way...

Do kids need to read Shakespare?
Do kids need to know that the War of 1812 actually ended in 1814?
Do kids need to know that objects fall at the same rate in a vacuum?

[ISiddiqui]

Well, personally, I am a big believer in a wide variety of subjects being taught through high school. Kids can decide what to specialize in during college, but in order to make an informed decision on that account, they need to experience everything.

Regardless, though, I think students do need to learn more than simply algebra in math (and I would be on board for statistics being a part of that requirement).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Well, personally, I am a big believer in a wide variety of subjects being taught through high school. Kids can decide what to specialize in during college, but in order to make an informed decision on that account, they need to experience everything.

But in order to do that, then at least some colleges/universities are probably going to have to rethink their requirements for admission.

I'll pick on the Univ. System of Georgia for an example of what I'm talking about.

Starting with the (HS) Class of 2012, to be eligible for enrollment into most of the state's public universities, you must have

*4 units of College Prep English - must include American, English, and World Lit courses, integrated with grammar, usage, and adv. composition skills

*4 units of College Mathematics - must include "Math" I, II, and III (see earlier discussion for how traditional Algebra I/II/III and Geometry I/II into this model) plus a 4th year of advanced math.

*4 units of college prep Science - must include 1x Biology, 1x Physics or Physical Science, 1x Chemistry or Earth Science or Environmental Science, plus 1x additional science course

*3 units of college prep social science - must include 1x US, 1x World, and 1x other

*2 units of foreign language - must be consecutive years of the same foreign language

-- So there's 17 units that are basically proscribed, whether you want to enroll at UGA or at Valdosta State.

Now we head to the HS requirements

-- Let's be generous & assume that the student has one outside interest that's got creditable classroom time, for discussion purposes let's say they're in band. 1x each year, so that's 21 units.

-- State HS graduation requirements mandate at least 1/2 year of PE & 1/2 year of Health, so now we're at 22 units (i.e. classes)

-- The state min. units to graduate is now 23, the assumption is generally 24 units is the max available (figuring 6 classes per year gr. 9-12)

So the remaining slots available for that "wide variety of subjects" is a maximum of 2 ... unless you want to eliminate something.

edit to add: I feel like I've got to make sure it's clear that I'm not trying to give you a hard time or arguing against your position. This was just an exercise meant to illustrate how it can be easier to say what we'd like than it is to actually get it. Even with my kid in one of the highest performing private schools in the state, one of my biggest concerns is how "mile wide but inch deep" the experience can be, they end up piddling at a goodly number of things but getting insufficient depth to be of any significant value in a large percentage of those.

[AENeuman]

Should the goal of high school be prepping all students for college? It seems that it is, but i'm not sure why. I know there has been a tripling of universities and enrollment over the last 40 years, but in 2006 in the U.S. only 17 degrees are earned for every 100 students enrolled. i think the big part of this failure is due to an inertia where most high school grads think they have go on to a 4 year or community college. essentially we have created a 13th and 14th grade with very little accountability.

[ISiddiqui]

I'll pick on the Univ. System of Georgia for an example of what I'm talking about.

Starting with the (HS) Class of 2012, to be eligible for enrollment into most of the state's public universities, you must have

I'm not sure why you think I'm against that. I think that's a good and wide variety of subjects mandated. Now I'd like to have more social studies, but that's not a bad start.

one of my biggest concerns is how "mile wide but inch deep" the experience can be, they end up piddling at a goodly number of things but getting insufficient depth to be of any significant value in a large percentage of those.

It's a valid concern, but I wonder how much depth you want to get into in high school. Not to belittle anyone who is or is married to a high school teacher, but the difference in 'depth' of subject from even AP high school classes and their corresponding freshmen college classes is night and day.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm not sure why you think I'm against that. I think that's a good and wide variety of subjects mandated.

I thought you were looking for more of a variety than was already there. Interpretation fail on my part I guess, my bad.