Is The Math Myth by Andrew Hacker Worth the Debate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Khatti
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Andrew Hacker, a Political Science professor, argues in his book "The Math Myth" that teaching higher mathematics to the majority of students is largely unnecessary and counterproductive. He suggests that only about 20% of students will benefit from advanced math, raising questions about the relevance of such education for the remaining 80%. Critics of Hacker's views emphasize the importance of math in developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills, regardless of a student's future career path. The debate also touches on the broader implications of educational curricula, questioning whether subjects deemed unnecessary should be removed entirely. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the need to balance practical job preparation with a well-rounded education that fosters intellectual growth.
  • #31
on what authority does he argue is he is not even qualified?

sounds like he is tapping into people's math anxiety to sell books.

do not let this man near any public policy switches.
 
  • Like
Likes whitsona2
Science news on Phys.org
  • #32
I get this general thing from students all the time. So, lately, I've been playing Devils advocate-- ok, we will only give math to those who are likely to need it. Let's see, statistically scientists are still most likely to be white males--so let's start there... wow! This is saving us so much time and money already! Awesome!
 
  • #33
From @gleem's post, the Keith Devlin article was excellent!
"Keith Devlin said:
On page 70, he presents a question from an admissions test for selective high schools. A player throws two dice and the same number comes up on both. The question asks the student to choose the probability that the two dice sum to 9 from the list 0, 1/6, 2/9, 1/2, 1/3. Hacker’s problem is that the student is supposed to answer this in 90 seconds.
Apparently (according to Devlin), Hacker's complaint about this problem is the time limitation. However, it shouldn't take someone a full 90 seconds to realize that both dice show the same number, with the sum being 9.

micromass said:
He also apparently argues that Gaussian distributions are not really necessary for actuaries
Gaussian distributions are waaaaaay too hard. Actuaries should learn about normal distrubutions, but what use will they ever make of Gaussians? :oldbiggrin:
 
  • #34
Mark44 said:
From @gleem's post, the Keith Devlin article was excellent!
Apparently (according to Devlin), Hacker's complaint about this problem is the time limitation. However, it shouldn't take someone a full 90 seconds to realize that both dice show the same number, with the sum being 9.

Even if one missed the parity shortcut, it shouldn't take 90 seconds to exhaustively list the four ways in which two six-sided dice can sum to 9 and note that none of them is a double.
 
  • #35
pasmith said:
Even if one missed the parity shortcut, it shouldn't take 90 seconds to exhaustively list the four ways in which two six-sided dice can sum to 9 and note that none of them is a double.
Well, maybe Hacker does find a double!:biggrin:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
Replies
10
Views
4K