Harvard Instituting Remedial Math Class

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lack of foundational skills does not equal inability to learn. Over half of American kids go to public schools with varying degrees of competence in teaching.

Kids who have a great capacity to learn are sometimes limited in who teaches them leading to graduation in high school without the necessary foundational skills.

Harvard-type students will learn quickly regardless of foundational skills and good on Harvard for recognizing that students with high potential may not all come out equal after high school.

Nice theory. How do you discern who is a “Harvard-type student” if they have no foundational skills? Even if I agree those “uneducated kids with great capacity to learn” are out there, absent standardized testing, they are surrounded by regular uneducated kids who (especially thanks to grade inflation) look exactly the same. Harvard is seeing the results of more or less randomly picking these kids and hoping they found the diamond in the rough. It’s why all evidence shows that testing actually helps the “Harvard type” kids that attend crappy schools because it allows them to show they are capable of doing the work.

[Anonymous]

Harvard has a standard. If the students can’t meet the standard, Harvard should not be dumbing down the standard.

My kid is gifted in math. His writing is atrocious. He will be not be applying to SLACs because they’re not a good fit for him. College is different than public school. Every college determines their requirements. Find one that focuses on your strengths.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Half of US high schools don’t offer calculus. I imagine there may be very bright students at Harvard and elsewhere who have had weak learning environments.

From the article:

The Harvard Math Department will pilot a new introductory course aimed at rectifying a lack of foundational algebra skills among students, according to Harvard’s Director of Introductory Math Brendan A. Kelly.

What does this say about Harvard admission? If they are admitting the best and brightest, why are they facing this issue?

You seem to be conflating preparedness with intelligence. Lots and lots of highly intelligent people have not had sufficient training and preparation to hone and apply their ability into skill. If Harvard, or any other university, sees it as part of its mission to educate that segment of the population, they’ll get no argument from me. You may resent that the algorithm you assumed applied to elite college admissions doesn’t in fact, but it has never been the practice of these universities to only take the most prepared and accomplished people.

Generally I agree with you. But it is really hard to come back from 12 years of neglected math. I am not saying that bridge programs and others are not doing great work, but pulling up kids with very bad math foundations to being able to get a math based stem degree is hard. Fine if Harvard believes some basic competency in math is necessary to graduate from Harvard but I think they are setting these kids up for heartbreak (as a cohort) if they are trying to go into math, physics, chem, engineering, etc.

[Anonymous]

To be fair, I know some Wharton grads who can't write.

You can be smart at many things and be deficient in others.

[Anonymous]

This is because the TO admitted students were not prepared and that's why they are now requiring test scores. A bit embarrassing for Harvard I am sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Either Covid learning loss was worse than we thought (and we know it was really bad) or test optional is a complete failure.

Harvard students don’t know algebra?

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/9/3/new-math-intro-course/

The Harvard Math Department will pilot a new introductory course aimed at rectifying a lack of foundational algebra skills among students, according to Harvard’s Director of Introductory Math Brendan A. Kelly.

It's not COVID. Everyone knows the reason why Harvard is going down the proverbial sh!tter but wants to beat around the bush in order to not have to talk about the elephant in the room - this is all a result of diversity at all costs and having diversity quotas. When they can't get the diversity numbers they want, they water down the standards for entry. Now they admit a whole bunch of unqualified students because of diversity and act surprised when they struggle with basic material they should have mastered 5 years ago.

We all know where this is headed. They won't be able to improve math 101 scores and a bunch of diversity admits won't be able to pass no matter how many remedial courses they offer. The solution of course will be to water down the rigor of the curriculums and cut basic math requirements rather than button up admissions standards in the first place. It's really just a a dumbing down of the entire university for progressive purposes.

I don't care if you're a stem major or a liberal arts degree. You should be able to pass and have mastery over a low IQ class like algebra if you're a Harvard student!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. I assume this is directed at first gen students, but still seems pretty nuts.

why would you assume that?

Many Asian American students are first gen, and they score very high in math, the highest of all groups.

First gen college students, not first gen immigrants.

(Do you need a remedial intro English class?)

? Many Asian American students are first gen college students. They are not immigrants. They are US born children of immigrants. Not all Asian Americans are wealthy or well educated. 70% of Stuyvessant students are Asian Americans, and many are low income kids (FARMs 48%).

Maybe take a sociology class or two and get out of your bubble.

90% of the FARM kids at Stuyvesant are Asian, vs being 70% of the population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting that when MIT encountered this issue, they dumped test optional admissions. Harvard is doubling down.

It’s clearly Harvard’s call to focus on equity more than academic excellence, but let’s not pretend it isn’t a choice.

+1 But then Harvard is still holding onto the antiquated system of legacies. IMO, they are more like a liberal arts college.

LLAC.

Big Liberal Arts College.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math M isn't a new course, and isn't remedial. It's functions and introductory calculus, which are college level calculus. This is a section of the same course that meets 5 days instead of 3 so that kids can get more support while taking this college level class.

"“What we thought was the best thing to do — instead of adding another course before MA — was to add more time and support into MA for students who would need it.”"

Previous commenters might be great at math but lack reading skills - or the willingness to actually read the article before blathering.

"Students don’t have the skills that we had intended downstream in the curriculum, and so it creates different trajectories in students’ math abilities,” Kelly added." That sounds like these kids aren't capable of taking a math course that begins with pre-calculus. Other schools would call that remedial for a college student, but these are Harvard kids, so we can't have that designation

+++ yes this is struggling with pre-calc. TO led to too many unqualified students getting in to what is supposed to be an elite college for the brightest students. It has long drifted from that goal; the TO phase was a new low in student quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At Harvard and can't do basic Algebra.

What a f***kg joke of a university.

They were too busy learning to plagiarize in their English classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is because the TO admitted students were not prepared and that's why they are now requiring test scores. A bit embarrassing for Harvard I am sure.

at least they have gone back to required! many top schools still have not!

[Anonymous]

at least they're trying to solve the issue.

[Anonymous]

I know plenty of MIT grads who are not writers. I'm not shocked that there are Harvard kids who are top 1% in something who are not great at calc. Not everyone can be everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math M isn't a new course, and isn't remedial. It's functions and introductory calculus, which are college level calculus. This is a section of the same course that meets 5 days instead of 3 so that kids can get more support while taking this college level class.

"“What we thought was the best thing to do — instead of adding another course before MA — was to add more time and support into MA for students who would need it.”"

Previous commenters might be great at math but lack reading skills - or the willingness to actually read the article before blathering.

"Students don’t have the skills that we had intended downstream in the curriculum, and so it creates different trajectories in students’ math abilities,” Kelly added." That sounds like these kids aren't capable of taking a math course that begins with pre-calculus. Other schools would call that remedial for a college student, but these are Harvard kids, so we can't have that designation

+++ yes this is struggling with pre-calc. TO led to too many unqualified students getting in to what is supposed to be an elite college for the brightest students. It has long drifted from that goal; the TO phase was a new low in student quality.

This is fairly obvious. If it wasn't due to to TO, then Harvard would've had this type of class pre TO.

IMO, Harvard is holding on to legacy because they aren't admitting the best anymore. MIT will become more prestigious in terms of actual academic strength than Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know plenty of MIT grads who are not writers. I'm not shocked that there are Harvard kids who are top 1% in something who are not great at calc. Not everyone can be everything.

pre-calc is not top 1% for a college student and certainly not for a student at Harvard