Fear of Mathematics

I used to LOVE math. In 6th grade, I would tutor other kids on the ride home - I took the front seat in the bus, and kids would sit next to me in turn, and ask me to explain what we talked about in class that day, or ask me to help them understand why A could equal C.

I got to Jr. High - OUCH. I’m dyslexic, so teh NUMBERS were always hard for me (is that 78 or 87?), but I adored the concepts (and give me a word problem any day!). Except they kept throwing NUMBERS at me. Fear of math started inching in… (teachers apparently LOVED to humiliate me by asking me to do calculations out loud). Changed school systems, and got good teachers again… LOVED algebra, LOVED geometry, wanted to do calc. Then got a sucky sucky sucky calc teacher. The guy didn’t teach, he told us to read the book, do the homework, and then write it on the board, whereupon he corrected any mistakes (often without any explanation), and sent us home again with more homework. I dropped the class mid-year, with a D because I refused to cheat on the midterm (everyone had written him off as a teacher, so the two kids who KNEW calc would do their exams FAST, and pass them around for everyone else to copy…).

Did my pre-admit testing for college, and I couldn’t even remember how to do algebra. I cried when I got home. I LOVED algebra. Ended up taking remedial math. Got another really really good teacher, who knew that most of us were suffering FEAR, not lack of brains. He would crack jokes when we started getting tense. Used to teach from the back of the classroom, or sitting down. Taught us how to derive everything possible (if you forget, you can always derive it). Average score at the midterm was a D, average FINAL grade was a B-. I got a D- for the midterm, and an A+ on the final. Went on to take my required trig/stats class (not a math major, here), and got an A.

Don’t use math MUCH, but still love a good puzzle. The logic and pattern of it appeals.

So because english is a language whose rules we learn early - and those rules don’t change much - we can slide by a bad english teacher without visible trauma (though I’ve seen the writing that results…). Still, if you can READ, you can figure out a lot of the stuff on your own. But math needs a passionate, interested, creative guide for every new level. There’s so much more complexity in the LANGUAGE of math, so much completely new at each level, that if you get one bad teacher, it beomes very hard to move on - either you don’t have the foundations for the next step, or having needed a guide and gotten someone who made you miserable, instead, it makes further exporation in math very unpleasant. I know at least three other people in my remedial math class who said if they’d had even ONE teacher as good as this one, they’d have enjoyed math a lot. Granted, once you are a grownup, it is your problem to get over, not the teacher’s. But kids shouldn’t be responsible for making the class effective.

basically, we can’t afford to have ANY bad math teachers. Some other topics are somewhat salvagable if you get one bad one, but math has a different flow - stage one is absolutely the foundation for stage 2, etc. (granted, you get a bad english teacher for the grammar level, and you have a problem, too…)

A few other thoughts somewhat related to the OP:

Regarding math and indeed many other subjects, it is my opinion that the bulk of our primary schools are not teaching the subjects very well. It’s been some while since I’ve been through the system, but I have met many smart people who’s capacity for understanding is far underdeveloped by the school system.

I would rather see our schools turning out people who understand as opposed to people who perform rules by rote memorization to arrive at the answer. Too often it appears to be a more advanced version of what you might teach a chimp: when you see this, do this. Students achieve enough ability to pass the exams, but since there was never any real understanding, what knowledge they had evaporates promptly thereafter.

Although there are exceptions, I think that most real life applications of math beyond the very elementary depend on understanding more than memorization. One can generally just look up what one doesn’t remember, but if you don’t have the basic skills to apply the right tools to the right problem, then there’s little hope.

My final thought (these are becoming increasingly unrelated to the OP I fear) is that we live in an increasingly technological society, where the percentage of the population that really understands the technology (which usually requires math, physics, and engineering) is becoming smaller, and the percentage for whom it appears magical is becoming larger. When one hasn’t the understanding of what’s “under the hood”, so to speak, then things with no basis in reality sound as plausible as real, workable technology. I’m not exactly sure what this means in the long term, but the increasing stratification between the “groks” and the “don’t groks” doesn’t seem like a good thing somehow.

I was 10 years old (young) when it became clear that I had a gift (and love) for mathematics.

Up until that time, I’d been the classic underachiever. Things came easily to me so I did the least amount of work required to skate by.

That changed when I got to the 5th grade. A wonderful teacher recognized that I had the aptitude and was skating. One day he called me to his desk, opened the drawer to display the paddle (mostly for effect but I didn’t know it at the time), told me that I wasn’t really trying, and offerred to help motivate me.

Well, being a 10 year old kid that didn’t like spankings I started to actually apply myself. And from that moment forward my life changed.
What Mr. Copeland (the teacher) taught us, wasn’t just the formulas, but how to think the math. Everyone was required to memorize the multiplication tables to 12x12 (Some teachers had only required memorization through 10x10), the squares for all numbers 1 though 25, and the cubes for all numbers 1 through 10. (My failure to memorize the squares had prompted the paddle display and ensuing discussion.)

Then he’d repeatedly drill the class with a monolog like:

The number is 3.
Multiply by 5.
Square it.
subtract 15.
Divide by 10.
What’s the answer?

Paper wasn’t allowed. We had to think our way to the answers. There was little pressure as the drills were only exercises – they weren’t graded.

Thinking back through grade school, the kids in that class were considered some of the best math students even during their high school years. I have to believe that the “training” given us in the 5th grade had a lot to do with it.

Wherever you are, Bless you Mr. Copeland.

Your former student,
Kent Olsen a.k.a.
SouthernStyle

SouthernStyle said:

Well, you know that I agree with most everything you and others have said about this topic, but I disagree with the above statement. I would say that the ineluctable course of modern European history, and hence modern World history (that does include America), ‘begins’ with the French Revolution.

KarlGauss

Down boy – you’ve taken things out of context.

While it certainly doesn’t hurt to know the politics as well as the military strategies of the French Revolution, it’s not a requirement in learning American History.

The French generally endorsing anything that the English opposed until about 1850, or the French and English coming down on the same side of endorsing the Confederacy are small items related to American history. But as building blocks, they have little bearing on the Korean War.

On the other hand the kid that never figures out what Pi is, or fails to graps limits will not pass pre-calc.

SouthernStyle

S.S. I’ve never firmly grasped the concept of any type of math, but I refuse to give up, or wait a year to go to the next level. Like I said before, I understand what’s going on. Everything is clear as mud. I just can’t apply it. Maybe I’m just stubborn. Either way, I’m guarenteed a C for taking the class, and if I just don’t get it, I can take it again as a Freshmen in College. It’s really not a big deal. Plus the teacher is a really great guy.
Also, FTR, I don’t NEED to take Calculas. Hell, I didn’t even need to take a full year of math this year. I have more than enough credits to graduate. This is just something I need to buckle down and do.
I wish I could remember math as well as I can remember history and English. Then life would be a breeze.

I think I’ve figured out where the system has broken down.
SouthernStyle

JonF said:

Fair enough; my point was just that they fell for the hoax not because they agreed with the claims in the paper, but because they did not understand them and decided to trust them anyway. It wasn’t pomo jargon that tricked them, but science jargon. This is deplorable, but it doesn’t stand as an indictment specifically of postmodernist scholarship; I’m sure that you, for example, could put together a hoax discussion of physics that would completely snow me (although I hope it would have to be a little more sophisticated than the stuff that got past Robbins and Ross). Naturally, I trust I wouldn’t be fool enough to publish your paper without getting a qualified referee’s opinion first! but again, that’s an isolated case of an editor’s error of judgement and doesn’t necessarily reflect on postmodernism or cultural studies as a whole.

Oddly enough, it seems to me, Sokal’s hoax actually had the effect of confirming one of the observations that the “science studies” people are always making: namely, that the effective power of science for most people lies much more in its cultural authority than in its epistemological validity. With a good degree and a respectable teaching position, you can put together a piece of complete BS and if it sounds technically impressive, nine out of ten quite intelligent people will believe you (as “creation scientists” know). So the social constructivists aren’t entirely wrong.

(Man, I can’t believe I’m actually sticking up for these people, but fair is fair.) Anyway, nice to chat with you again, I don’t think we’ve been in the same thread since we battled the Velikovskians together back in the 360-degrees-in-a-circle debate.

And while I’m hijacking, did I miss something or did RM Mentock just severely flame himself for his group-theory explanation? I think he should lodge a strong complaint with the moderators and have them threaten to ban him if he attacks himself like that again. :slight_smile:

Kimstu

Why? Because the maybe 40 or 50 students out of 500 are taking a difficult class as Seniors, many of them with an A average who are going to try their best, are guarenteed an C. I’m sorry, maybe that would be considered the break down of the system if used in regular math classes, or with less responsible students. But the people who are taking Calculas next year are the top students in the Class of 2001. I don’t think there is anything wrong with assuring students they will not get an F for taking a difficult class they don’t even need to graduate, and marring an otherwise perfect record in the process.
Not all of us are “gifted” at math, or “love” it. Some of us strugle for every inch. Maybe you can’t grasp the concept that no matter how hard people work at math concepts, it just doesn’t make sense. Fine. Live in a world where everybody who isn’t good at math is just not applying themselves correctly.
However, as for me, I’m going to work my ass off to keep an A average, but it’s nice to know that either way I’m not going to get a big fat F. Consider it an extra incentive for students like me.

Well, I’m the one who flamed and I guess I gotta defend myself here. If he ever does that again, I’ll flame him again. No excuse for that. When you pull stuff off the internet, ya gotta expect that half of it is crap. You have to recheck everything.

I am terrible at math. I don’t like it and it doesn’t like me. However, I struggled through math in high school and some in college because I hate not knowing things. Struggle being the operative word. I left collage feeling as if I had a good base in math.

Now I come to this thread and see that I haven’t finished learning the fundamentals. Pre-calc was as far as I got.

So my question is: What is basic math? I don’t know group theory, yet it is supposedly so simple!

I know we have some very intelligent posters here at the Dope. Many of who have extensive knowledge in specific areas. Yet, if I don’t know who was third in line for the English throne during the War of the Roses I am not accused of being historically illiterate.

This is not to say that we as a country do not suffer from mathophobia; we do-- hell I do. But where does innumeracy start?

Ptahlis,

I think I will have to agree with you on the barbarian corollary going both ways. There does seem to be snobbery from the math and science crowd toward the artsy folks. And of course what I said is a generalization, not all of the ‘artsy’ folks I know have that ‘barbarian’ attitude.

I’ll offer a thought. Academia during the 40’s, 50’s, and early 60’s was dominated by the science crowd. This began to change during the late 60’s and throughout the 70’s, so that the arts crowd now dominates. One side always hates it when the other has the upper hand.

Any comments on this theory?

Pepperlandgirl~ Good luck on your class! Every step you take toward learning what you can is a good one.

I’m through apologizing for not knowing calculus and trigonometry and every other type of math I don’t have down pat. I DO NOT use most of those equations in my normal, everyday life. I’m too busy running after 3 children, keeping a home, loving my husband, and trying to work competently and efficiently at my job to worry about how every little appliance and piece of machinery in my life works. It’s not worth the headache for me, and frankly, I’m tired of being told that I’m stupid for not having a level of competency at this that you seem to feel is so necessary to life.

I have never enjoyed math. As a matter of fact, I hate it. When I have to balance my checkbook, I get out the calculator, because it means that I don’t have to spend as much time on it. This does not make me stupid, or ill-educated. Math never came easy for me, for some people it never does. You may not like this fact, but there it is.

Just as some people will never like onions, some people will never like math. It’s a personal thing.

Indy said:

Yeah: [snobbery] this is what happens when we let mathematicians try to do history! [/snobbery] :slight_smile: All right, all right, I’m sorry, I’m sorry, and anyway if that were true it would DQ me too. But I think we need to define some terms and understand some contexts before we can have a meaningful discussion on this.

First, what do we mean by “dominate”? Certainly academic science really started expanding as a result of WWII and Cold War incentives for technological development, so it sort of leaped into the limelight in the decades that you mention. But as a percentage of overall academic effort, or in absolute dollars, I think there’s no question that science got much bigger in the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s. Especially these last few years, with NEA/NEH funding shrinking and universities pulling more and more of their operating costs out of science grants overhead, the sciences are far more crucial to academia’s basic financial survival now than they were some decades ago.

Or are we talking “dominate” as in sort of being the cultural flagship of academic institutions? Also not so clear: is, say, postmodern theory today really more important than the New Criticism or Cold War political science was back in the 50’s/60’s? In what way do you see academic “dominance” as having switched from sciences to humanities (which is what I presume you generally mean by “arts”) in the sixties? Or is this way too hijacky?

Kimstu

Thank you :slight_smile:

Pink Slink wrote:

I am terrible at math. I don’t like it and it doesn’t like me. However, I struggled through math in high school and some in college because I hate not knowing things. Struggle being the operative word. I left collage feeling as if I had a good base in math. Now I come to this thread and see that I haven’t finished learning the fundamentals. Pre-calc was as far as I got.

When I wrote the OP, I was talking about adults not being able to handle fractions and percentages. Calculus is difficult and is not a requirement for basic math literacy.

Brea wrote:

I have never enjoyed math. As a matter of fact, I hate it. When I have to balance my checkbook, I get out the calculator, because it means that I don’t have to spend as much time on it.

I’m sorry that you hate math. You don’t need to know how to
solve equations or know calculus or trigonometry to run a household. On the other hand, you do need to know how to manipulate fractions when you multiply a recipe for extra guests, you need to know geometry if you want to know how much paint to buy to paint a room, you need to know percentages and interest when negotiating a home loan. Knowing math does not make you more virtuous than someone who does not know it, but knowing math makes life easier to navigate.
Kimstu wrote:

Oh, please! Are you trying to say there aren’t hoaxes, frauds, misunderstandings, controversies, and all-out wars in science and even math?

Of course not! Blondlot and his N- rays, Kemmerer putting ink on frogs’ nuptial pads, and Fleischman and Pons’s premature announcement of cold fusion are incidents of foolishness or dishonesty in science. The important difference between science and the humanities is that science is self-correcting. If a researcher errs and his results cannot be reproduced, his theories are discarded. On the other hand, if I submit a paper to the MLA suggesting that Jane Austen’s heroines are really lesbians, how can you say I’m wrong? In the humanities, interpretation really is purely subjective. I won’t even touch postmodern so-called scholarship(I just washed my hands :slight_smile:
By the way, Kimstu, while I disagree with your position, your intelligence, wit, and writing ability make your posts a pleasure to read. I’ll buy you a cup of coffee and a discussion of Lacan anytime you say.

What do you think are the requirements for basic mathematical literacy? What should every citizen know, of the world of mathematics?

Until we have an answer to this question, it seems silly to deride the insufficiency of the average Joe or Jane’s knowledge of math, since we haven’t defined ‘sufficiency’.

Ok; I’ll bite.
[ul]
[li]Basic Arithmetic To balance a checkbook, calculate the cost of 15 pounds of apples, find the cheapest price per ounce among competing products.[/li]
[li]Trig/Geometry Enough to calculate how much carpet, or fill dirt, or concrete pavers you need, even for odd shapes.[/li]
[li]Algebra Enough to calculate your own house payments, or take percentages.[/li]
[li]Statistics Enough to understand the lottery and know what statistics used in newspaper articles really mean. (As an aside, I’m surprised statistics isn’t emphasized more at the high school level.)[/li]
[/ul]

IMHO, of course. Comments?

Gosh, I hesitate to do this. If this belongs in the BBQ pit or some other arena, please let me know…

My “problem” isn’t with you, Pepperlandgirl. It’s with a system that would give you a “C” just for signing up.

I’m only aware of two meanings for a grade of “C”. One is that the class is graded objectively (on a curve) and all scores close to “average” receive a “C”. The other is when the class is graded subjectively and “C” means satisfactory. Since math can clearly be graded objectively I’m forced to ask how just showing up can be average.

It’s an insult to those people that have ever taken a class for which they had to work their ass off to receive a passing grade.

You claim that you already have an “A” average – yet you’d take this class that you clearly dislike and risk your perfect mark. Then you try and convince us that you have added incentive because you’re guaranteed a passing grade? It seems to me that I’d be much more motivated to run if I knew the dog could catch me.

You also claim that math isn’t your strong suit. It’s clear that English is down the list a bit as well. (Check you spelling.) Now that we know that you struggle with the abstract (math) and communications (English) please tell us exactly what it is that you’re good at and how it is that you’ve acquired this “A” average? Do they give points at your school for showing up? Wearing matching earrings? Are there bonus points for hygiene?

The fact that the class is voluntary makes no difference. Do you propose giving a “C” to someone that takes chorus and can’t sing a note but shows up every day? How about the kid that’s in driver’s ed and can’t keep the car between the lines? Or the kid taking shop who, after only 6 weeks practice, can cut a sheet of plywood with minimal blood loss?

“Hey they showed up every day. Gotta give them a ‘C’!”

I’ll not apologize for criticizing a system that would give you a “C” just for showing up. When you finish growing up, perhaps you’ll come to understand that the system doesn’t owe you a passing grade.
SouthernStyle

It means if I do all the work and participate in class but still bomb the final, I’m not going to get an F.

Do you think the people motivated enough to take the class in the first place are going to settle for the C just because it’s guarenteed? I’m not going to, and neither is anybody else.

Colleges and Univeristies are more impressed with people who make the effort and barely succeed than people who take consumer math and score an A. I’d rather challenge myself than ride away with a 4.0 I know a lot of seniors who were overlooked by Universities in favor of other students, and the only difference was their math class. Some seniors had Calculas, and the seniors that were overlooked at Pre-Cal.

Considering the fact I was responding at 7:30 AM before breakfast and coffee without my contacts in, I think I did a damn good job with the spelling.
Well this year I had Honors English, Honors American History, Pre-Cal, Speech, Spanish, and Acedemic Competition. My Freshmen and Sophomore years I had the standard classes, some of them were advanced classes if I could manage it. I’m ranked number 41 out of 521. I don’t think that’s too bad. It could be better I guess, but it could be a lot worse.

[sarcasm]Yes, because AP Calculas is along the same lines as the afore mentioned classes.[/sarcasm] Two of which are life and death situations, which Calculas is clearly not. And the choral example happens all the time.
Which is worse, students not taking the class *at all * because they are frightened of math, or students who face their fear to at least attempt the class because of an assurance they will not fail.
FWIW, a C is not that impressive. It just means you pass. It’s not like they are promising A’s, or B’s.

Maybe so, but in the mean time I’m going to be damn grateful that I have the chance to take this class w/o fear. Otherwise I would never, ever even think about taking an advanced Math class.
Schools are graduating students who don’t even know how to read, and you are freaking out because one math teacher is not going to give anything less than a C in an advanced class?
Maybe you should be more concerned about the students who never took anything more than they absolutely had to to graduate,(ie, consumer math, and every elective they could possibly fit in their schedule) rather than the students who are doing everything they can to be the absolute best they can be.(Like the students who are taking all AP classes next year) Like I said before, none of us are going to happily settle for a C. Even those of us who can score 4.0 could be screwed by a single 2.0, that would drop the average down to 3.71. That won’t happen, as everybody who is in that particular math class is also trying to graduate with better then a 3.85.Right now I’m in a 20 way tie to be number 21. None of us are going to give an inch. The simple reason for that is, the majority of us plan on going to a UC school. UC has implemented a program that automatically accepts the top 4% of a graduating class. All of us really want to be in that 4%
.