Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I really think the path through education should be based on the expected outcomes.
With a good teacher, algebra is not hard to learn. Providing students are motivated to learn it. But there is a growing percentage, IMO, of those who challenge anything and everything that is "traditional" about education, and learning advanced math is one of those traditions that is harder and harder to justify.
I, as a contractor, use math every day. Geometry, trig, and algebra...each and every day. But we are a shrinking minority. And, to add to this, technology is making the process more about just knowing what you need and how to get it, as opposed to knowing the process needed to find the answer.
IMO, we would be better off by requiring kids to learn a practical application of mathematics, heavy on consumer math, interest, lending, borrowing, compounding, and the basics of macro and micro economics then in teaching kids algebra, just because it is how we had to do it. Tradition isn't always the best answer.
I think basic algebra is an essential thinking skill - it's all about how to answer a question by working from what you know toward what you want to know.
I agree, it makes little sense to require a subject that is simply too hard for some people. Those kids are much better off staying in school and learning math they are likely to use as adults.
Quote:
With a good teacher, algebra is not hard to learn.
... for students with average or better intelligence. But for a kid with an 85 IQ, which is likely typical in urban public schools, algebra may as well be string theory.
I'm not surprised that a teacher is proposing dropping the teaching of a subject thought to be "too hard" by students. After all, Shakespeare is no longer required reading in an increasing numer of universities, even for English literature majors. *Sigh*
I'm not surprised that a teacher is proposing dropping the teaching of a subject thought to be "too hard" by students. After all, Shakespeare is no longer required reading in an increasing numer of universities, even for English literature majors. *Sigh*
It's all part of the slide downwards toward idiocracy. Of course there will be a group of elites who actually do know how to write, do algebra, and read properly and everyone else can serve them without question.
Sure let's dumb down our educational requirements to the level of 85 iq students so they can all graduate and feel better about being stupid.
It's all part of the slide downwards toward idiocracy. Of course there will be a group of elites who actually do know how to write, do algebra, and read properly and everyone else can serve them without question.
Sure let's dumb down our educational requirements to the level of 85 iq students so they can all graduate and feel better about being stupid.
It really has more to do with the computer age or "information" age. It's simply not needed anymore. History is another one of those subjects that would be better replaced with Civics. Cursive writing, spelling, it's all rarely used.
Most kids in college are required to use their computer programs to write papers. Their spelling is corrected by the program. Their problem is they didn't learn how to manage programs like "Word" or "Office." If it were me I'd switch it up a bit as well. Times are changing and education needs will follow.
Now if we required more memory use by repetition and less well roundedness for every student, we'd be ahead in most areas. IMO, of course.
I agree, it makes little sense to require a subject that is simply too hard for some people. Those kids are much better off staying in school and learning math they are likely to use as adults.
... for students with average or better intelligence. But for a kid with an 85 IQ, which is likely typical in urban public schools, algebra may as well be string theory.
Wow.... Why don't you tell us your IQ smartypants. I see what you did there. Tell me where you got your data on urban public school IQ? Stormfront?
Sure let's dumb down our educational requirements to the level of 85 iq students so they can all graduate and feel better about being stupid.
Dropouts are more likely to go on the dole or become crooks. Isn't it better for everyone if they do stay in school, learn what they're capable of learning and graduate?
I'm not surprised that a teacher is proposing dropping the teaching of a subject thought to be "too hard" by students.
You don't believe that algebra is too hard for some people?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
