See, that’s what I’m talking about. You did so much math that you never learn reading comprehension. I absolutely believe that it should be an option to pursue math at that level. But it’s been required in schools for generations. Totally pointless and stupid.
Since you're such a great reader, can you tell me what this sentence means? "And in 9th grade, we actually don't know who the future engineers are, so we teach everyone."
What it means to me: we are going to make everyone learn the stupid math, on the off chance one out of every 50 will be an engineer. I say we trust the kid to decide what here she wants to take. If they decide later on, they want math, there are programs for that. But the world is it going to stop because a 15-year-old decides not to takentrigonometry.
The speedometer in a car is the idea of calculus but anyone can use it without knowing any math. That won't work with statistics. There's a reason high school statistics and even the non-rigorous college statistics are unsatisfying. The textbook authors and professors have worked very hard to try to remove the calculus so while it's a little more involved than chugging numbers there's always the sense of something missing. Being led around by the nose isn't education - the student without higher math can't answer the simple question, "Why are you doing what you're doing?"
For example I heard a police officer claim someone had to be speeding becuse they hae to go 10 over to catch them. Well of course you did.
You know I am not sure what to say about that. I don’t calculus or trig is required for basic reasoning ability though.
I would very strongly hope for the vast majority of citizens to possess more than what currently passes for "basic reasoning ability." There are, of course, multiple paths toward that end. Even though I value STEM instruction highly in developing reasoning and general problem-solving abilities, I believe there are ways humanities courses can be taught to foster reasoning abilities as well (yet again, in ways that go beyond "basic reasoning ability").
It is not. The only thing I ever used it for was a2+b2=c2 to determine how far the quarterback threw the ball. Other than that it’s useless. To me anyway.
How tf did you figure out how far a ball was thrown using the pythagorean theorem? You would actually do it using a formula resulting from, get this, *calculus*!
Since you're such a great reader, can you tell me what this sentence means? "And in 9th grade, we actually don't know who the future engineers are, so we teach everyone."
What it means to me: we are going to make everyone learn the stupid math, on the off chance one out of every 50 will be an engineer. I say we trust the kid to decide what here she wants to take. If they decide later on, they want math, there are programs for that. But the world is it going to stop because a 15-year-old decides not to takentrigonometry.
I'll step up and defend the OP. Beyond basic math it shouldn't be required, it should be offered, but not required. For those that love it, hey.. go crazy with all the Maths.
Ive never used anything beyond the most math. The time I spent in algebra was a waste of effort on everyone's part, me, the teacher, etc..
Most would be better served learning practical things like personal finance, interest rates, rate of return on investments, and things that you actually have to know to live.
Because what you and the dumbf*ck above don't understand is that math is taught to improve your REASONING. Do you reason in your daily life? Do you make inferences? Make arguments? Then you're using the skills taught in the math class.
Most would be better served learning practical things like personal finance, interest rates, rate of return on investments, and things that you actually have to know to live.
Sure, broadly speaking, you can consider opportunity cost in terms of how time is spent, but this is an either-or fallacy nevertheless.
Trigonometry is extremely practical. The only people who complain about 'math being hard' or 'math not being used' are people who were bad at it (dummies). I agree that there are practical subjects which need time in the curriculum as well. Shop class, personal finance, etc but there's only so much time in the day.
Yup. You cannot become a carpenter without knowing trig.
It is not. The only thing I ever used it for was a2+b2=c2 to determine how far the quarterback threw the ball. Other than that it’s useless. To me anyway.
How tf did you figure out how far a ball was thrown using the pythagorean theorem? You would actually do it using a formula resulting from, get this, *calculus*!
To do that, you're going to need to know the velocity, angle of trajectory and height thrown. I think what you need is a tape measure and walk it off.
I was speaking with one of my former athletes who received a full academic scholarship for aerospace engineering. He was bitching about the fact that he had to take 6 years of calculus and would never have to use it in his job because you pretty much plug everything into a computer model these days.
I realize that whoever wrote the computer model had to know some math…..
I'll step up and defend the OP. Beyond basic math it shouldn't be required, it should be offered, but not required. For those that love it, hey.. go crazy with all the Maths.
Ive never used anything beyond the most math. The time I spent in algebra was a waste of effort on everyone's part, me, the teacher, etc..
Most would be better served learning practical things like personal finance, interest rates, rate of return on investments, and things that you actually have to know to live.
Your post was not wise. Just because a person can pass Series 6 or Series 7 exams with low level math skills, the reason the Three Card Monte game of finance doesn't implode, bs finance requires 3 levels of calculus; bs economics requires 3 levels of calculus.
Seriously, why in the world do we make kids take algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and sometimes calculus while in high school? About 90% of people in the world don’t need any math beyond arithmetic, statistics, and maybe some very basic algebra. Only computer people or nerds or engineers need any more math than that. Let’s offer it but not require it. It would make everyone’s life easier. Prove me wrong.
Discus.
I don't think the minimum requirements are that high. I know there's remedial math at many colleges, so some kids that get to college obviously got there not knowing much math. I know calculus wasn't required.
Here are some real-life non-job usage of geometry and trigonometry in running. It's useful to let you know how to run the tangents in the curves on the NCAA cross country championship course to cut down the lead of someone unclear on the concept. It suggests staying in lane 1 to run the minimum distance in track if you aren't at risk of getting boxed in. It lets you calculate exactly how much extra distance you run if you want to move out to lane 1.5, or 2, or 3 to stay out of the box. It lets you can calculate how much extra distance Kemboi or Chelimo runs by swinging out to lane 6,7, or 8 on the final straight. It lets you calculate the average grade of a climb or descent based on distance and elevation gain or vice versa. It lets you convert grade to degrees if that helps someone visualize the angle better.
I don't know anything about vo2max but I do know it's a mathematical model, and that there's calculus behind it because it takes time to get warmed up and also because of "max".
It is not. The only thing I ever used it for was a2+b2=c2 to determine how far the quarterback threw the ball. Other than that it’s useless. To me anyway.
How tf did you figure out how far a ball was thrown using the pythagorean theorem? You would actually do it using a formula resulting from, get this, *calculus*!
I don’t know I used that right triangle business. So the quarterback throws to the ball from the 20 yard line to the other 20 yard line. He also throws it towards the sideline. So by yardage it goes 60 yards, right? But it also went diagonal. So how far did it go? The king part of the right triangle right?
I was speaking with one of my former athletes who received a full academic scholarship for aerospace engineering. He was bitching about the fact that he had to take 6 years of calculus and would never have to use it in his job because you pretty much plug everything into a computer model these days.
I realize that whoever wrote the computer model had to know some math…..
Anyone who takes 6 years of calculus is repeating an awful lot.
In the country that stole Laplace/Fourrier methods and called them "Feynman Calculus", it's legitimate to abandon Algebra at whole and call for the creation of a brand new Algebra called "monetizing".
We don’t make kids take all those classes you mentioned to get their high school diploma. Many elect to do so.
But while most do not use the particular skills of solving those problems, the process of learning how to solve those problems teaches them critical thinking and general problem solving skills that do get used in many areas of life.
Also not needed in your adult life:
Reading Shakespeare, learning about the US Revolution, learning the periodic table of elements, learning another language, etc.