Reply to Math in the US

Forum Index » Schools and Education General Discussion

Reply to "Math in the US"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Integrated math is usually done very poorly. When I looked at after school programs the best of them like AOPS and RSM do algebra and geometry classes. The worst are integrated math like Kumon and Mathnasium, which are more a random collection of worksheets. I can see how in a class setting integrated math is going to be a sprinkling of everything while barely scratching the surface before moving on to something else.

We prefer the traditional approach and went with AOPS. It’s not only algebra and geometry but other courses as well, number theory, counting and probability, precalculus etc. I don’t see how anyone could do all of them at the same time or why even attempt it. How would that even work? Like a week each of geometry, algebra, number theory, statistics trigonometry, precalculus. The topics would be so spaced out that the poor kids will forget half before getting to the next topic.

Integrated math is one of those educational fads that end up going nowhere.
[/quote]

I don’t know anything about the after school programs but I think it’s odd to call integrated math a fad when the whole point of this thread is that it’s extremely common in other countries, some of whom are known to be much better at teaching math than the US[/quote]

Often people quote PISA assessments as proof that US math education is really bad. Many of the top countries select who takes the test or have early tracks into vocational training which skew the results.

National curriculums may be good at raising the averages, but not great for the bottom or top students. The top 5% of students in US are not behind other countries, based on coursework completed by end of high school, they are better prepared for college.

Whoever has the patience can read this very thoughtful and interesting article in how Chinese scholars compare the math education with that in US. It may challenge many of the assumptions in the thread.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8291123/[/quote]

Interesting. 
[i]"Xia: Chinese students are really good at exams. Take the GRE advanced math test as an example. Among applicants to Northwestern University, Chinese students mostly rank at >90% in the exam. But, once the ETS, which administers the exams, changed the styles and inventories of the questions, their test scores mostly fell to 70% and above. Several years after the changes, their test scores came back again to 90% and above. So we can tell that the scores of Chinese students cannot truly reflect their preparedness for math, but rather their preparedness for taking exams. Maybe we should change the styles and types of questions in the Gaokao every year, so that repetitive training would not work."

"Xia: All these factors are relevant. But I think, as we have talked about, the exam-oriented education system is not good at selecting and cultivating innovative talent. Yes, the system is good at cultivating skilled workers conforming to a uniform standard, but not innovative talents with independent thinking."[/i]
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics