-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
"Virtue signalling" is just a more boring way to say someone's tooting their own.
"Social justice warrior" is a straight example of verbal irony, and it's weird some people don't get that. No, I don't mean people like you, 2D8HP, who notice the words are neutral and get confused when they're used as a slur. That's just a normal case of irony flying under someone's radar. I mean people who honestly don't get that "social justice warrior" is made of neutral words and think it is and has always been unironically negative.
A similar phenomenom existed with "White Knight", with some people apparently complete unaware that the phrase could be used unironically to communicate a notion of romantic chivalry.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post yours here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2D8HP
<comic>
Know that someone responding "Those terms are used ironically" does not lessen my annoyance.
What's next, "Orphan feeder" as a slur?
How about "Caretaker" and "Honorable" as slurs as well?
:confused: :annoyed:
That's a great comic. I love Dork Tower.
As far as being used ironically? They're not. These are generally people who actually feel that "social justice" is an undesirable goal. That it's political correctness taken to too high of a degree. I don't understand it, personally.
I believe "virtue signaling" is supposed to mean that the person is showing off kind of? Like "hey, look how virtuous I am"? So I kind of get that one maybe?
Regardless, this topic is bound to bring out the real-world politics, so we might want to leave it at that. Sorry.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post yours here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
2D8HP
.
I first encountered the previously unknown to me term "SJW" at this Forum about a year ago, and "Virtue signalling" quite recently (what can I say, I'm old and out-of-it), and after a quick web search I learned, to my bewilderment and annoyance, that it was a slur and that the letter "J" contained in it stood for "Justice".
Some months later I saw a delightful
webcomic, that articulated my confusion and annoyance:
Know that someone responding "Those terms are used ironically" does not lessen my annoyance.
What's next, "Orphan feeder" as a slur?
How about "Caretaker" and "Honorable" as slurs as well?
:confused: :annoyed:
To be fair, anything can be a slur if you say it with enough anger, even "Orphan Feeder".
In the case of SJW it's an insult-by-association kind of a thing. It's not so much about the individual words, but the group of people it represents. When that insult is thrown at you people are saying you are like the people who call themselves SJWs (even if you share little to no values with those people). In terms of insult it is often quite similair to "Alt-righter" or "Communist". The people who call themselves those words deem nothing wrong with the group and the people who use the words as insult care very little for your actual believes or position, simply using it as a catch-all term for people who oppose them on certain issues.
National, Socialist German, Worker and Party are also all fairly neutral terms, but if you put them together (at least in my language) you get quite the powerful insult ;) (which is also more often than not completely misused as a catch-all to the point is has lost a lot of meaning).
Virtue Signalling on the other hand is a more obvious insult, the 'signalling' bit referring to it being disingenuous. You're not doing something because it needs to be done or because you actually believe it, you're not trying to correct an injustice you just want other people to know that you're believing the 'right' thing. If you ever get the feeling that someone who you were having an online discussion with stopped addressing you and is more or less monologueing than that's an example of virtue signalling. They don't want to get a point across, they're not having an honest argument, they simply want to let themselves and any potential audience know that they believe the right thing.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Orphan Feeder definitely can be a slur, depending on to whom you have fed the orphan.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
I haven't read the entire thread, so this may have come up already.
WHen it comes to math, what scares people away from it? And not the really complicated math (which isn't necessarily complicated if you have the basic concepts), but things such as simple algebra and case by case break down. Is it a systemic problem where teachers don't know what they are teaching to the degree they should? Only teaching surface understanding so that math becomes a black box in which things just happen? For those for who math doesn't come to easily, what is your experience with this?
I am coming to this question as someone who takes those weird math questions that pop up on social media that say "take your age, do a bunch of arithmetic, get the year you were born." sort of thing. To me, the interesting thing is taking the problem and figuring out why it works. It already says what it does, so there is no interest in that.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
I haven't read the entire thread, so this may have come up already.
WHen it comes to math, what scares people away from it? And not the really complicated math (which isn't necessarily complicated if you have the basic concepts), but things such as simple algebra and case by case break down. Is it a systemic problem where teachers don't know what they are teaching to the degree they should? Only teaching surface understanding so that math becomes a black box in which things just happen? For those for who math doesn't come to easily, what is your experience with this?
I am coming to this question as someone who takes those weird math questions that pop up on social media that say "take your age, do a bunch of arithmetic, get the year you were born." sort of thing. To me, the interesting thing is taking the problem and figuring out why it works. It already says what it does, so there is no interest in that.
Highlighted for emphasis.
Whether it's a teaching problem, or that's actually just the way the student learns best, many people learned math through rote memorization. Given the sheer number of people (especially in the west) that are terrified of math, I'm inclined to think it's at least partly a teaching problem.
I've always felt this was best exemplified by the "times tables". Do you know your nine times table? Your 12 times table?
I'm an engineer. My life is algebra. I have never learned a times table, even back in grade 3. I just learned how to do multiplication, and did it when I needed to. The times tables were a memorization shortcut that prevented learning the process.
In the end, whether or not you agree with the methods, this is what Common Core is attempting to solve. It's trying to remove the black box, and teach the methods, not the results. There's probably plenty wrong with Common Core (I'm Canadian, so I don't have much exposure to it, and this isn't the place to discuss it anyways) but that's why it exists, and the goal is solid.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
Highlighted for emphasis.
Whether it's a teaching problem, or that's actually just the way the student learns best, many people learned math through rote memorization. Given the sheer number of people (especially in the west) that are terrified of math, I'm inclined to think it's at least partly a teaching problem.
I've always felt this was best exemplified by the "times tables". Do you know your nine times table? Your 12 times table?
I'm an engineer. My life is algebra. I have never learned a times table, even back in grade 3. I just learned how to do multiplication, and did it when I needed to. The times tables were a memorization shortcut that prevented learning the process.
In the end, whether or not you agree with the methods, this is what Common Core is attempting to solve. It's trying to remove the black box, and teach the methods, not the results. There's probably plenty wrong with Common Core (I'm Canadian, so I don't have much exposure to it, and this isn't the place to discuss it anyways) but that's why it exists, and the goal is solid.
I would say that when I went through school, what I learned was both times table and proper multiplication. The first was to show the patterns inherent to the numbers, the latter so you know what you are actually doing.
As for New Math, having talked to some teachers, the point of the system is to give students multiple options to find what makes math click in their brain, and allowing the student to use that method to solve problems.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Not to boast, but I'm rather good at maths--I have an A level in the subject with an A grade, which is the highest qualification you can get in the UK short of going to university. However, it took me about a year before I "got" algebra--I struggled with it for months, and it's only because I really liked the subject that I just didn't give up on it. I can quite easily see how someone would be in the same situation but would *not* have the impetus of enjoying it, and so wouldn't bother.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Not to boast, but I'm rather good at maths--I have an A level in the subject with an A grade, which is the highest qualification you can get in the UK short of going to university. However, it took me about a year before I "got" algebra--I struggled with it for months, and it's only because I really liked the subject that I just didn't give up on it. I can quite easily see how someone would be in the same situation but would *not* have the impetus of enjoying it, and so wouldn't bother.
Is A level like completing American high school? Or is it more advanced? Are the classes optional?
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
In my day, A-levels are taken at 18, taught from ages 16-18.
You studied 3 subjects, though I think that has changed a bit these days. For example, I took Maths, Physics and Chemistry. In my school we also did General Studies, but this did not lead to an exam in most cases, where we studied a few other things of our choice. This was more to keep us occupied I suspect, as I was at a boarding school - not sure this was generally true.
Now, my day was nearly 30 years ago now (and now I feel old :smalleek:), and I believe things have changed somewhat in that time (I think you take AS at 17 for example), but I believe it is still more specialised that US high school (although I know little about that). Maybe someone with more recent experience (or children) can give a more up-to-date overview.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Not to boast, but I'm rather good at maths--I have an A level in the subject with an A grade, which is the highest qualification you can get in the UK short of going to university. However, it took me about a year before I "got" algebra--I struggled with it for months, and it's only because I really liked the subject that I just didn't give up on it. I can quite easily see how someone would be in the same situation but would *not* have the impetus of enjoying it, and so wouldn't bother.
I got good grades in all 4 Calculus just to spite someone who told me "If I couldn't handle Engineering, you're not gonna fare better in it."
I'm at my last semester currently. I have no plans on working as an actual engineer. I'm just super petty and vindictive.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mikemical
I got good grades in all 4 Calculus just to spite someone who told me "If I couldn't handle Engineering, you're not gonna fare better in it."
I'm at my last semester currently. I have no plans on working as an actual engineer. I'm just super petty and vindictive.
You're my hero.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
Is A level like completing American high school? Or is it more advanced? Are the classes optional?
It's an exam, rather than a schooling level. Think the O.W.L.s and N.E.W.T.s in Harry Potter. A levels is the latter, where you only pick a subset of the subjects you got your O levels for, and dig deeper into them, and then need to demonstrate what you know in the exam to obtain the A level. Most universities require you to have certain A levels to join.
GW
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Grey_Wolf_c
It's an exam, rather than a schooling level. Think the O.W.L.s and N.E.W.T.s in Harry Potter. A levels is the latter, where you only pick a subset of the subjects you got your O levels for, and dig deeper into them, and then need to demonstrate what you know in the exam to obtain the A level. Most universities require you to have certain A levels to join.
GW
So kind of like SATs or ACTs, but for specific subjects? Makes sense.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
I would say that when I went through school, what I learned was both times table and proper multiplication. The first was to show the patterns inherent to the numbers, the latter so you know what you are actually doing.
As for New Math, having talked to some teachers, the point of the system is to give students multiple options to find what makes math click in their brain, and allowing the student to use that method to solve problems.
Well, sure, if you want to be less cynical about it I guess. :smallbiggrin:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mikemical
I got good grades in all 4 Calculus just to spite someone who told me "If I couldn't handle Engineering, you're not gonna fare better in it."
I'm at my last semester currently. I have no plans on working as an actual engineer. I'm just super petty and vindictive.
Yeah, that's bull anyways. Most engineering math has little to do with calculus, anyways. Especially anything beyond Calc 1. Calc and engineering math split off in completely different directions, so being good at one is no real indication of being good at the other.
Is your degree going to be in engineering? Math? Science? Or did you take all 4 Calc courses alongside a history degree or something just for the spite?
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
WHen it comes to math, what scares people away from it?
(This is a topic me and people close to me from the teaching field have discussed quite in lenght, so if I come off as very opinionated, bear in mind that I have a pretty much cemented opinion on the issue)
It surely is sprinkled with specific cultural issues; but form what I experienced in my mind, most of it comes from the mysticism people and teachers tend to imbue anything related with math, or even anything that utilizes numbers. "Math wizard" sounds familiar? It's not just an expression. People generally think you just *have to be exceptionally intelligent/smart* if you are at least good on Math. Not even mentioning when making calculations "on the air" is a easy as breathing for you since you were a kid.
Of course, it's mostly a great myth/lie. Math is just a system/language, and the sole reason anyone is "good" at it is simply practice. Just like with any language. Now Pure Mathematics is a very contrived, utterly difficult/complicated subject*. But most people aren't aware such thing even exists, because that's not what we are taught in school. And that's not what they usually refer either. I've seen a lot of truly and sincerely smart/intelligent people thinking themselves "dumb" because they "aren't good with numbers". Yet they still mastered many other areas of knowledge and more importantly have quite an easy grasp of any significantly complex subject that isn't directly related with numbers. More often than not, it's because they had a lousy way of dealing with maths (which may include teachers, parents and environment in general)
*Just as Linguistics is a very complicated subject too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
Is it a systemic problem where teachers don't know what they are teaching to the degree they should? Only teaching surface understanding so that math becomes a black box in which things just happen?
Depending on the society, the teaching profession is more or less disrespected. Maybe because the demand is higher than the offer (or the other way around); maybe because the profession doesn't hold the respect it deserves in the society, and sometimes because the Government doesn't give crap. That is a sad truth. The first is an issue, because that means that not every Math teacher will always teach Math. And conversely, not every teacher who teaches Math was prepared for the specific subject. Maybe he is a Physics teacher, or not even a teacher at all (like a professional: Architect, Engineer, etc). So they may not be optimally suited for the task. The other two issues are out of Forum Rules; but suffice to say they are equally as harmful and the end result is ultimately the same: People who end teaching Math maybe don't have the desire (they teach Math but wanted to teach something else) or lack the proper tools to teach at all.
But the problem of Math is more relevant than say... Chemistry; because Math is one of the most pervasive subjects we learn in school, along with language, and probably history. But having poor scores in history won't make you fail taxes; so people usually don't care :smalltongue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
I've always felt this was best exemplified by the "times tables". Do you know your nine times table? Your 12 times table?
I'm an engineer. My life is algebra. I have never learned a times table, even back in grade 3. I just learned how to do multiplication, and did it when I needed to. The times tables were a memorization shortcut that prevented learning the process.
To bring a comparison; I am a person who studies language; and I have NEVER learned the tenses in my mother tongue (Spanish). Memorization was never of any use for me. Which is lucky, because my memory sucks forever :smalltongue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Not to boast, but I'm rather good at maths--I have an A level in the subject with an A grade, which is the highest qualification you can get in the UK short of going to university. However, it took me about a year before I "got" algebra--I struggled with it for months, and it's only because I really liked the subject that I just didn't give up on it. I can quite easily see how someone would be in the same situation but would *not* have the impetus of enjoying it, and so wouldn't bother.
Coincidentally, most of my top grades in school were basically language and math based :smalltongue:
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
joeltion
Coincidentally, most of my top grades in school were basically language and math based :smalltongue:
Couldn't stand languages--I even got a D for English Language at O-level!
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Couldn't stand languages--I even got a D for English Language at O-level!
So, do the O and A stand for anything?
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f0/12/4a/f...1f236a567c.jpg
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
....WHen it comes to math, what scares people away from it? And not the really complicated math (which isn't necessarily complicated if you have the basic concepts), but things such as simple algebra ....
.
Well we are homeschooling our 12 years old (13 on Jan 20th) son so that he may learn algebra among other subjects (it's not taught at his grade level, and he told us that with "group learning" almost all his time in class was spent by him in telling the other students in his group stuff he already knew, and that he himself wasn't learning anything new), because my son wants to learn computer science at the college (U. C. Berkeley, I know get in line his hope probably won't happen) and otherwise they're just not enough years to learn all the required subjects for admission.
My own experience "learning" algebra was that age 13 (1981) four of us at my school I were deemed to "ready" for algebra, so we were handed the text and told to sit in one corner of the classroom and "teach" each other, within two months, not really knowing what to do, we were playing card games instead. The next year I was placed in a new school in which if all of us showed up (no one was out sick) then someone would have to sit on the floor in class. The algebra teach was Mr. Henri (I still remember his name because a classmate told me that he had tried to sexually proposition her), and on the first day of class Mr Henri told us "Half of you will fail this class", and I was among the half that failed.
I did learn some algebra about 20 years later when it was taught as part of "math and science for plumbers" by my local Union. It was much easier to learn the subject in that class because:
1) The teacher knew the subject (he said he got interested because of "Reading Isaac Asimov stories).
2) We all had chairs, and were serious about learning the subject.
3) They were less than 30 students in class.
4) Instead of 50 minutes 5 days a week the class was taught for two and a half hours two nights a week, so we actually had a little more class room time on the subject.
5) We weren't juggling other classes (but thr class did impact how much sleep you'd get before working the next day.
6) The teacher monitored our progress and answered our questions.
.
In California at least passing First Year Algebra is required to be admitted to College,
which
many don't,
which is a shame because at least in the building trades, Algebra (and Geometry and especially Trigonometry) is useful to know.
Some may be able to learn Algebra just from a book, but most need a teacher who has and takes the time to answer questions and check on a students progress, I know in my case back in 1981 to 1983, no teacher did, my mother didn't know the subject and my father claimed to know the subject but was too stoned when he wasn't working to answer any questions.
I think the main answer as to why so many have trouble learning algebra is simply because they're not really taught the subject.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
joeltion
... People who end teaching Math maybe don't have the desire (they teach Math but wanted to teach something else) or lack the proper tools to teach at all.
This is a good point. Especially in elementary school, where you often have the same teacher for (almost) every class. How many of those teachers do you think got their degree (before teaching, as most teachers have a base degree) in history, or sociology, or some other field where math was not the focus? Clearly there's a large portion of teachers whose personal focus didn't include mathematics.
And that's not to disparage those focuses. If anything, it's to say that maybe there should be multiple teachers at younger years? But there's logistic issues for that... I don't really know what my point is, except to agree with Joelition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
joeltion
But the problem of Math is more relevant than say... Chemistry; because Math is one of the most pervasive subjects we learn in school, along with language, and probably history. But having poor scores in history won't make you fail taxes; so people usually don't care :smalltongue:
Yeah, I'm terrible at history, geography, geology. Basically any class where there's no "process" to learn, and you need to memorize or fail. Though I was better at history than geography, since there was at least an order of events to learn.
But while I wasn't good at geography, I'm very good at navigation and pathfinding. Go figure.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
history...
.
I loved History!
The year before High School I saw a stack of textbooks being stored at my Junior High School (they're called "Middle School" now), I stole some and avidly read them during summer break.
One of the textbooks turned out to be used by a "World History" class I took one to two years later, and I had my best (and easiest) grade I "earned" that semester!
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Thanks for all the replies to my question. I figured that I got a much more positive experience with maths in general than the average student, and it helps to have specific stories that show these differences.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
Thanks for all the replies to my question. I figured that I got a much more positive experience with maths in general than the average student, and it helps to have specific stories that show these differences.
I had a great experience with math, too. Largely due to my natural tendencies, a few excellent math/science teachers, and some relatives (an engineer and a chemistry prof) who instilled a love of science into me.
Which brings up one more point - this is a self-replicating problem. If parents hate math, they can show the kid that it is something to be feared, leading them to fear it as well. We need to watch ourselves around kids, so they don't get these biases from us. (Including myself with history et al.)
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
Yeah, that's bull anyways. Most engineering math has little to do with calculus, anyways. Especially anything beyond Calc 1. Calc and engineering math split off in completely different directions, so being good at one is no real indication of being good at the other.
Calculus shows up disproportionately often in deriving equations relative to using them, but there's a lot of calculus in some engineering fields. Chemical engineering is heavy on it, and I've heard the same about electrical.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Knaight
Calculus shows up disproportionately often in deriving equations relative to using them, but there's a lot of calculus in some engineering fields. Chemical engineering is heavy on it, and I've heard the same about electrical.
As somone with a civil engineering degree (no employment yet), calculus is used for understanding the equations, but in my academic case studies, the most we used calculus for is to find the maximum or minimum points of a function. So very basic calculus.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Peelee
You're my hero.
I'm gonna put this on my signature and you can't stop me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
Yeah, that's bull anyways. Most engineering math has little to do with calculus, anyways. Especially anything beyond Calc 1. Calc and engineering math split off in completely different directions, so being good at one is no real indication of being good at the other.
Is your degree going to be in engineering? Math? Science? Or did you take all 4 Calc courses alongside a history degree or something just for the spite?
Electronical Engineering(with a mention on Computer Science). I'll be able to make my own multi-sequenced christmas lights, with blackjack, and hookers!
As for the courses, Calc 1(Derivates and limits), 2(Integrals, area calculation), 3(Multiple integrals and volume calculation of irregular spaces) and 4(LaPlace's transformation, etc) were all part of the program. Then you have Algebra(third semester), and it's follow up, Numerical Analysis, which many people call Calc 5(because its available at fifth semester) but is actually just a slightly more boring version of Algebra.
Other than that, currently learning French and teaching myself how to make 3D models. Will probably look into learning other languages(already speak English, Spanish, and a little of Japanese).
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
WHen it comes to math, what scares people away from it?
In general, the idea that it's not part of ordinary life. Which is untrue.
I remember my parents doing math flash cards with me and my siblings, and answering questions like, "Are we there yet?" with "Jay, it was thirty miles to grandad's house, and we've driven seventeen. How many more miles are there?"
I distinctly remember the first time I recognized a question in my life as a math word problem. I could usually find a Coke bottle for 2 cents along the road to the store, so I routinely went to the store with my ten cent allowance to buy a twelve cent comic book. But one day I had a quarter and a nickel. The question was, how many bottles did I have to find in order to buy three comics? That's ... a word problem. They aren't made up for school; they really exist: 25 + 5 + 3X = 3(12). Math can make things better! [And it wasn't hard to figure out that I needed three bottles.]
But the story doesn't end there. I eventually found my three bottles, went to the store, turned them in and got 6 cents. Then I picked out three comics. I laid them and my money on the counter and the cashier said, "That'll be 37 cents." I objected, and he explained sales tax to me. [It was the first time I'd bought enough to pay tax on.] Having spent twenty minutes deciding I wanted these three comics, I was flummoxed. Finally, the cashier took pity on me.
"Kid, do you want these two comics?"
"Yes, but I want this one, too."
"Trust me. Do you want these two comics?"
"Yes, but -"
"OK, sold." [He picked up my quarter and put down a penny.]
"Now, do you want this comic?"
"Yes."
"How much money do you have?"
Two pennies and two nickels. "Twelve cents."
"Sold."
So that was really a formative day for me. I learned about math word problems, taxation, ... and tax evasion.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Knaight
Calculus shows up disproportionately often in deriving equations relative to using them, but there's a lot of calculus in some engineering fields. Chemical engineering is heavy on it, and I've heard the same about electrical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mith
As somone with a civil engineering degree (no employment yet), calculus is used for understanding the equations, but in my academic case studies, the most we used calculus for is to find the maximum or minimum points of a function. So very basic calculus.
Yeah, it mostly shows up in the theory end of engineering, rather than day to day.
But yes, electrical uses calc a fair amount. I didn't realize chemical did too. All I meant was that most engineering disciplines (besides those two), even if they use formulas derived from calc, don't actually make use of calc on a regular basis.
Calc is still important to them, but you'll need algebra far more in, say, civil and mechanical.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
Yeah, it mostly shows up in the theory end of engineering, rather than day to day.
But yes, electrical uses calc a fair amount. I didn't realize chemical did too. All I meant was that most engineering disciplines (besides those two), even if they use formulas derived from calc, don't actually make use of calc on a regular basis.
Calc is still important to them, but you'll need algebra far more in, say, civil and mechanical.
The reason I specified Civil degree is that our math is usually the simpilest, since a lot of it is static.
-
Re: Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
This is a good point. Especially in elementary school, where you often have the same teacher for (almost) every class. How many of those teachers do you think got their degree (before teaching, as most teachers have a base degree) in history, or sociology, or some other field where math was not the focus? Clearly there's a large portion of teachers whose personal focus didn't include mathematics.
And that's not to disparage those focuses. If anything, it's to say that maybe there should be multiple teachers at younger years? But there's logistic issues for that... I don't really know what my point is, except to agree with Joelition.
It's not just the logistics implications, but what most people don't realize is that in most educational systems there are two levels of learning for people between 6-17 yrs old.
Spoiler: A VERY ABRIDGED VERSION
Show
The first level (usually for kids and pre-teens) is just the chapter of your learning where you are both being "socialized" (just like in kinder, but a lil better than that) and you are taught the "methods of learning". That's precisely why having different teachers for each subject wouldn't work. You need a single (or a minimal group) teacher that can follow and understand how the kid/preteen deals with any subject and basically make his brain "function" under the pressure of learning. Anything you learn here is basically a "practice mode" for actual learning. That's why the focus on this stage is on Social subjects and Math; because the conform the basic tools to learn actual subjects or the various specializations (Physics, Chemistry, Philosophy, Arts, etc)
The second level (for teens) is where you have different professors or teachers for each subject, and the true "learning" begins. Here's where having specialized teachers actually make sense, because here you learn the actual useful stuff. Or at least the stuff an uninformed adult wouldn't be able to grasp in a matter of hours at most.
Suffice to say that both kind of teachers have to be interested mainly in making the students interested in learning as a whole, and teach them about how to learn and truly grasp the significance of knowledge. That's the real relevant thing a teacher should impart. A teacher whose fanaticism/disinterest makes you figure a disproportionate or surreal idea about the subject is what hurts learning the most.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
Yeah, I'm terrible at history, geography, geology. Basically any class where there's no "process" to learn, and you need to memorize or fail.
I generally had the same issue. I needed to feel myself interested in the history I was studying to actually learn it (hence why some parts of history are a blurr for me) but I failed every other test where it was just "match the date with these events". I was more the type of "there was a big war where a ton of people died, I think it was around the 40's" :smalltongue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ve4grm
If parents hate math, they can show the kid that it is something to be feared, leading them to fear it as well. We need to watch ourselves around kids, so they don't get these biases from us. (Including myself with history et al.)
That is specially true, because people don't usually realize how important is the part of learning we do outside of school. Sometimes it's even more relevant than academic formation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jay R
So that was really a formative day for me. I learned about math word problems, taxation, ... and tax evasion.
Who said learning was for losers? :smallcool: