/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14814200
I think it is more psychological. I think it is a better method of starting the kid off step by step, so easiest to hardest

That's what they tried back in the 1960s in America
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math
It didn't work very well. Kids only start picking up on abstract explanations long after they've been shown concrete examples of them.

>>14814200
Teaching is a meme. People can try it in whatever order they want and the smart kids will still do well and the dumb kids will still fail. There's no established good way to educate or it'd all be an an exact evidence backed science already and nobody would disagree about it or have high dropout rates anymore.

Because math is like a building block. You can't solve differential equations without knowing arithmetic, algebra, logs, fractions, etc, etc, etc.

>>14814205
Not a sucessful method.
At least in my personal experience with math.

>>14814208
Why not teach kids just elementary math, and when they're preteens work more in something like history of math, where they just like get a historical overview of math ideas, and we work instead on problem solving skills.
And then later we try to teach PHD ideas like difussion models and shaders when they're like 15, to get a taste of what is real math.

And then later in college when they're 18-20, we start with calculation problems.

Honestly, I see a waste of time, talking from personal experience to get a 12 year old kid to enjoy math while doing dumb linear equations.

Kids obviously wont understand the Why and just will hate math.

I rather have a slower method that makes kids like math instead of one that can create better math skills, but where most of the students will drop out or fail.

Seems honestly a method that doesn't work.

Honestly, I don't see the point of teaching math until you're older than 20 in college.

>>14814209
>>14814218
Just keep anything higher than elementary math, reserved for college.

And just go with algebra when you have a class of older teens.

>>14814200
Because the public education system developed in the industrial era to prepare people for factory work, bland sterile environment, starting and ending on a bell, following menial instructions to the detail, etc

>>14814200
i need help anons. im 40, never got past primary school math education but can do basic calculations. i would like to be at a higher level, what route would you encourage to use to learn? gcse type lessons. go back to the drawing board and do 1+1 type stuff? i was told by a math teacher that missing a step can really hinder someones ability.

>>14814635
> 40
it's too late bro just enjoy what time you have left

>>14814635
Start with Gelfand's Algebra, then Apostol's Calculus (it includes linear algebra). After that, you must decide where you want to go and what do you need. Math is too vast to just study it in general.

Someone would also advise you to work through something like "How to prove it" between algebra and calculus, but I find that kind of book retarded. The problem most people have with proof is that they don't know how to create them, not that they don't understand what a logical OR is.

>>14814200
They tried this in the 60s and it was a collossal failure. It turns out teaching 6 year olds set theory doesn't help them learn how to add numbers. The truth is most adults, after 12+ of mathematics education, can't calculate 15% of $50 or solve ax + b = c in a real world problem. The goal of mathematics education should be to produce adults with basic mathematical competency, because it actually comes in handy in every day life, even for people with shit jobs. Only then can we start worrying about producing more STEM candidates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math?wprov=sfla1

>>14814218
>You won't always be carrying around a calculator in your pocket when you're older.
|State|

>>14814219
>And then later we try to teach PHD ideas like difussion models and shaders when they're like 15, to get a taste of what is real math.
I think there's a substantial amount of ""Math"" that is touted as some objective, holy truth, despite being based on flawed models and fraudulent data.

I think that's probably an important issue to address as well.

>>14814635
Just do khan academy don't listen to the other retards here. If you try to do apostol without a decent high school background you'll just get frustrated.