New Math: An Analysis of its Validity

  • Thread starter Thread starter DiracPool
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Term
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the educational approach known as "New Math," which was introduced in the mid-20th century but ultimately deemed ineffective. Participants share personal experiences, highlighting that while some found value in its abstract concepts, many others, including those with a strong mathematical background, criticized it for being overly simplified and disconnected from practical applications. The consensus indicates that New Math was an educational experiment that failed to resonate with students and parents, leading to its eventual phasing out by the Ontario school board in the late 1970s.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic arithmetic operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division)
  • Familiarity with abstract algebra concepts, particularly group theory
  • Knowledge of educational methodologies in mathematics
  • Awareness of historical educational reforms in North America
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the historical context and implementation of New Math in the 1960s and 1970s
  • Explore the principles of abstract algebra and its applications in modern mathematics
  • Investigate alternative teaching methods for mathematics, such as the Trachtenberg system
  • Examine current educational standards and curricula in mathematics across different jurisdictions
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for educators, curriculum developers, and parents interested in the evolution of mathematics education and its impact on student learning outcomes.

  • #31
WannabeNewton said:
Pretty sure Jim was talking about engineers and inventors.

Good point. Yeah, understanding is important for engineers and inventors.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #32
My father is an Engineer and I had a conservation with him regarding new math many years ago during my high school time. From what I gathered, he felt completely discouraged in his mathematical abilities for a good part of his education, because he never understood the purpose behind of stating axioms while solving algebraic equations or looking at problems in terms of sets. If it wasn't for the fact that a family friend, who worked at NASA explicitly told him that 'while there is a use for this kind of thought, at the end of the day, as an engineer, it's your ability to use math to solve real problems, not made up ones, that matter.' that got him to stay and eventually obtain an engineering degree instead of working the family avocado farm.

Looking back at my own educational experience, I can say with a high degree of confidence I would've felt the same. I disliked most of abstract algebra, I disliked most of my theory based probability, and I wrote my thesis with the sole intent of taking an abstract idea and making it concrete for myself. In the end, the mathematics has always just been a tool for me to analysis real world data. I think education needs to accept that for a lot of people, mathematics is just that, if not less.
 
  • #33
In the end, the mathematics has always just been a tool for me to analysis real world data. I think education needs to accept that for a lot of people, mathematics is just that, if not less.

Thanks all - that was exactly my line of thought.
 
  • #34
Evo said:
I'm glad to hear you say that because I also didn't recognize anything in that wiki article, nor do I have any memories of it being strange or confusing. I was beginning to think all of my childhood memories of math were false.
Maybe you and I both happened to go to schools that were administered the placebo.
 
  • #35
WannabeNewton said:
The beauty of math and the challenge of math is in the abstractions ...

It's been too long to really appreciate your quote, but not so long as to remember I began feeling exactly the same somewhere around differential equations. :smile:
 
  • #36
MarneMath said:
My father is an Engineer and I had a conservation with him regarding new math many years ago during my high school time. From what I gathered, he felt completely discouraged in his mathematical abilities for a good part of his education, because he never understood the purpose behind of stating axioms while solving algebraic equations or looking at problems in terms of sets. If it wasn't for the fact that a family friend, who worked at NASA explicitly told him that 'while there is a use for this kind of thought, at the end of the day, as an engineer, it's your ability to use math to solve real problems, not made up ones, that matter.' that got him to stay and eventually obtain an engineering degree instead of working the family avocado farm.

Looking back at my own educational experience, I can say with a high degree of confidence I would've felt the same. I disliked most of abstract algebra, I disliked most of my theory based probability, and I wrote my thesis with the sole intent of taking an abstract idea and making it concrete for myself. In the end, the mathematics has always just been a tool for me to analysis real world data. I think education needs to accept that for a lot of people, mathematics is just that, if not less.


Avocado farm, are you kidding me?! That would have been freakin' AWESOME :!) :!) :!)!
 
  • #37
lisab said:
Avocado farm, are you kidding me?! That would have been freakin' AWESOME :!) :!) :!)!

It's a nice little place down in south Texas. We also do bell pepper. To this day, the world Abuelo y Abuela is synonymous with pepper with me, and I can smell the morning fields with dew.
 
  • #38
dlgoff said:
but not so long as to remember I began feeling exactly the same somewhere around differential equations.

I LOVED Diffy-Q because it explained how so many things work.
The next course, vector calculus, was simply too much for me. One finds his limits...
I do admire and envy those who can handle abstract math. My earlier remarks were not a put-down, just it's not for everybody including me.

There are doubtless people who understand the Laplace Transform.
To me it's only a useful tool that I don't understand.

Fourier transforms we worked out by hand as exercises in AC circuits class. Prof gave us an arbitrarily shaped wave and we developed the first five or six transform pairs by ruler, pencil and sliderule.
That enabled me to believe it was indeed true that a periodic wave can be represented by a polynomial in sines. A most useful concept.
But my plodding brain had to see at it from that direction before I could accept the derivation.
I thank goodness for that practical classroom exercise !
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
832
Replies
97
Views
16K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
20K
Replies
1
Views
3K