How much math do we really need?
Mr. Chase of the Random Walks blog came across an article by G.V. Ramanathan, a professor emeritus of mathematics, statistics and computer science at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
The author beautifully argues a few obvious (to me) facts to which the establishment intentionally or not remains blind.
Unlike literature, history, politics and music, math has little relevance to everyday life. That courses such as "Quantitative Reasoning" improve critical thinking is an unsubstantiated myth. All the mathematics one needs in real life can be learned in early years without much fuss. Most adults have no contact with math at work, nor do they curl up with an algebra book for relaxation.
The author argues that 27 years and billions of dollars after the appearance of the Nation at Risk report the state of education is claimed to have worsened, not improved.
Those who do love math and science have been doing very well. Our graduate schools are the best in the world. This "nation at risk" has produced about 140 Nobel laureates since 1983 (about as many as before 1983).
As for the rest, there is no obligation to love math any more than grammar, composition, curfew or washing up after dinner. Why create a need to make it palatable to all and spend taxpayers' money on pointless endeavors without demonstrable results or accountability?
We survived the "New Math" of the 1960s. We will probably survive this math evangelism as well -- thanks to the irrelevance of pedagogical innovation.
If there was a referendum I would subscribe to every word in the article, except for one sentence:
All the mathematics one needs in real life can be learned in early years without much fuss.
While this is true, that Most adults have no contact with math at work, nor do they curl up with an algebra book for relaxation, there is no reason to "study" all the required math in the early years. I would devote those years of natural curiosity to acquaint the children (without any pressure of exams and passing grades) with the beautiful treasures that human culture has to offer. They will learn the necessary math along the way and, if not, they will be able to cover it later on in a year or two - at most. Children should be able to see, observe, and sample from a variety of human endeavors and find out which of them resonates best with their innate abilities. In later years, the purpose of education must be to help them develop those individual abilities, not to impose on them uniform curricula.
Related posts: