Henry writes:
<<
. . . Due to recent test results in LA & other
places, people are starting to ask the question "why teach algebra?"
I've been pondering this question for years, and have never been able to come
up with a simple answer that would be compelling to a non-mathematician,
non-engineer. Does anyone on this list have such an argument?
-------------------------
Steve Lopez of the LA Times:
". . . We ought to make sure students can take all the trig and calculus they want. But
for others, I'd rather see a reality-based math curriculum that prepares students
for life, equipping them to balance a checkbook, understand credit card finance
charges and challenge the IRS."
. . .
>>
I've also pondered the question, but soon answered it the way Steve Lopez.
Schools are generally weak in life-preparation courses, perhaps partly because
choosing the curricula would be controversial. But surely math-in-the-real-world
courses could be valuable. One way to help improve the sitiuation is to train
teachers better, perhaps with continuing education into their first five years
on the job.
I also think many students flunk algebra (Lopez cites a figure of 44% in one district)
largely because the teaching can be execrable.
Two reasons to take algebra are 1) to avoid shutting yourself out of all professions
that use any math at all beyond arithmetic, like carpentry; and 2) algebra is a
venerable set of mental calisthenics that hones your reasoning ability.
But if there is some way to determine that a student is extremely unlikely to ever need
algebra or pass it, what Lopez wrote applies. After facility with arithmetic I'd put
statistics high on the list.
When I took math, it was nothing but arithmetic through 6th grade. I came to
despise arithmetic this way. Luckily I knew there was more to math than arithmetic.
But math should not be boring drills for six years. It should be designed to be fun
as you go. Fortunately, a lot of new curricula for math do mix in a bt of this, a bit
of that throughout the elementary years.
--Dan
