Should Algebra Be Required At Community Colleges?

[vela]

There is a double standard going on here that rarely gets talked about.

One of my former colleagues would always bring this point up in discussions about STEM education. She would note how people are considered educated if they know about literature, history, art, and so on even if they are woefully ignorant of science and math. But if you turn that around, a scientist or mathematician who's not well versed in the humanities isn't considered educated so much; rather, he or she is just a nerd. Given this common attitude, it's not surprising that math gets the short end of the stick in K-12 education in the US.

I think this double standard is recognized and gets talked about a lot by STEM faculty, but it's hard and nearly impossible to overcome the biases held by the general public.

 

[Apple_Mango]

The two points that are brought up in favor of keeping math as a requirement is that math teaches problem solving skills. The second point is that math must be required so that people may be well versed in education. However, why should one learn Algebra 1 for problem solving skills? If one wanted to learn problem solving skills, one would take philosophy or English classes that teaches problem solving skills. People don't have to learn maths to learn problem solving skills. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, I fail to see how people should learn maths just to be well versed in education. Nobody would agree that English teachers must learn Chinese to be well versed in education. What's the point for English teachers in learning Chinese to become well versed in education? I mean, who really cares?

 

[Dr. Courtney]

The two points that are brought up in favor of keeping math as a requirement is that math teaches problem solving skills. The second point is that math must be required so that people may be well versed in education. However, why should one learn Algebra 1 for problem solving skills? If one wanted to learn problem solving skills, one would take philosophy or English classes that teaches problem solving skills. People don't have to learn maths to learn problem solving skills. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, I fail to see how people should learn maths just to be well versed in education. Nobody would agree that English teachers must learn Chinese to be well versed in education. What's the point for English teachers in learning Chinese to become well versed in education? I mean, who really cares?

Quantitative problem skills are the issue. Qualitative problem solving skills are not the same.

 

[bhobba]

I think this double standard is recognized and gets talked about a lot by STEM faculty, but it's hard and nearly impossible to overcome the biases held by the general public.

Its one of the education myths I have alluded to - that somehow English relates to literature. It doesn't. Actually the US system is better than the Australian system regarding that - they have AP English and Composition which IMHO teaches the communication skills people should know in their daily lives, both at work and being a citizen. We do not have an equivalent here. We have English for work or something like that but its not enough to get you into university. Note - I am not saying you are not exposed to literature etc in lower grades, but just like we do not expose people always to advanced mathematical concepts in 11 and 12 there is no need after grade 10 IMHO. Communicating is vital - in fact one of the most important subjects I did in my math/computing degree was professional communication A and B. They have now removed it. which I personally am against despite my weak English ability - again it was because people disliked it. IMHO It shouldn't be done at university though - but in grade 11 and 12.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

Quantitative problem skills are the issue. Qualitative problem solving skills are not the same.

Exactly. In day to day living certain quantitative problem solving skills are very important. Let's not take quadratic equations, but rather the sum of progressions. Form that you understand why taking a mortgage out over a long term leads to paying vastly more than paying it out early. But from speaking to people their knowledge of even basic concepts of financial math is woeful. They don't understand even simple passive investing eg put say just $100.00 a month in a simple index fund for 40 years and you will be a multi-millionaire. I have explained that to people who spend that sort of money at poker machines, Lotto etc and they just don't believe me until I show them the math. That simply should not happen. And don't start me on understanding economic concepts that's even worse because they haven't done calculus eg you cant'y talk about the theory of the firm etc let alone game theory.

Thanks
Bill

 

[symbolipoint]

Its one of the education myths I have alluded to - that somehow English relates to literature. It doesn't. Actually the US system is better than the Australian system regarding that - they have AP English and Composition which IMHO teaches the communication skills people should know in their daily lives, both at work and being a citizen. We do not have an equivalent here. We have English for work or something like that but its not enough to get you into university. Note - I am not saying you are not exposed to literature etc in lower grades, but just like we do not expose people always to advanced mathematical concepts in 11 and 12 there is no need after grade 10 IMHO. Communicating is vital - in fact one of the most important subjects I did in my math/computing degree was professional communication A and B. They have now removed it. which I personally am against despite my weak English ability - again it was because people disliked it. IMHO It shouldn't be done at university though - but in grade 11 and 12.

Thanks
Bill

The point for Communication is good. Both Mathematics (including Algebra 1 & 2) and English (some courses) do teach the organizing of information; both which are important to people within and outside of science and engineering fields.

 

[olivermsun]

Well let's not get too pedantic about this. I failed senior English, detested Shakespeare, in fact its a pet hate of mine people are forced to endure it after grade 10. I had long discussions with people that thought it was important as an example of good English - my opinion is bollocks. We need to be able to understand what we read and write clearly, critically and intelligently, which is NOT literary deconstruction - that's something else again. A valid area of study - sure - but not necessary.

I guess I don't understand why you see such a hard distinction between understanding what we read and writing clearly (about it), and literary criticism (not necessarily "deconstruction"). "Critical thinking" in math pretty universally depends on familiarity with previous concepts, or at least the ability to get familiar with those concepts through some kind of research. Recognizing parallels with other, similar problems, is also typically a key aspect of mathematical problem solving. Wouldn't understanding of something one is reading necessarily hinge upon knowing something about the ideas that the text depends upon (even if is not explicitly stated within the text)?

Like algebra we need exposure to it - I am all for that - but it - well actually made me mad that you pretty well have to study Shakespeare in grade 12 and not calculus to go to university.

Usually, one only has to spend a few weeks reading Shakespeare among other topics. "Calculus" is a whole-year commitment at the very least. Hard to say in either case whether the topic is completely understand by that point, but likely not.

 

[olivermsun]

Quantitative problem skills are the issue. Qualitative problem solving skills are not the same.

Could you expound a bit more on what you mean? Are you saying that quantitative skills need Algebra, while qualitative is the part that is covered by other topics?

 

[symbolipoint]

Quantitative problem skills are the issue. Qualitative problem solving skills are not the same.

Very good. Clear. Applicable.QUANTitative --- how much, counting, the way quantities work, the way numbers work

QUALItative --- what is one thing and what is another thing, share any properties, related or are they not related

 

[bhobba]

I guess I don't understand why you see such a hard distinction between understanding what we read and writing clearly (about it),

Professional communication was nothing like English in grade 11 and 12. You actually did useful things like writing a research paper, reading sources such as the Wall St Journal and discussing it, giving presentations - things you do in day to day professional life and as a citizen. You did not read Shakespeare, poetry and many other things high school English here in Australia did. I am biased because I never to any degree got Shakespeare, understood poetry and that other stuff. Its left brain/right brain stuff. I am very left brained and English, especially the literary side is very right brained. For me it was HARD - I just didn't get it. Yet you are FORCED to do it here in Australia. If it had practical value like at least some of math OK - but it didn't.

This is the crux of the whole thing - some people find left brain stuff hard and forcing them to do a highly left brain oriented thing like algebra seems - well - cruel - and it to a certain extent is. But the rub is this - here in Aus you are exposed to all areas during your early schooling which is fine. But at some point you have to say that phase is over. I think its grade 8 - but will accept grade 10. Certainly by 11 and 12 its past that stage IMHO. And by 11 and 12 you should have done algebra - there is something very wrong with a system where people still have to do it at college.

I must point out at university away from this forcing you to do stuff you don't like and are not even good at I blossomed. I went from a very mediocre student to straight honors. Its not a 'trivial' thing - at least for me it wasn't.

Thanks
Bill

 

[madison wolf]

http://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.3.20170728a/full/

The chancellor of the California Community Colleges system believes that students who are not majoring in math or science should not have to take intermediate algebra to earn an associate degree. California has the largest community college system in the US, and what goes in California sometimes spreads across the country. What do you think? Is algebra necessary for students who don't plan to pursue a career in the sciences? -Physics Today

As someone who tutors community college students frequently, this is something I don't really have a solid answer for. Most of the students who fail out of the school in my county is due to the math requirements, and severe lack of any foundation they received while they were in grade school. So from a pragmatic perspective, if you're not looking to major in fields related to science, I don't see much of a reason to force people down this tunnel of failure that weeds out more people from associates degree programs than introductory calculus does from engineering programs.

I propose this, condensing the requirements down for general degrees to one general education style class that covers arithmetic for basic accounting, reading and following plots (not creating them), how those plots can be abused to manipulate statistics, and incorporate how to use all of this in a spreadsheet to manage finances. I honestly believe these are the core things we should be teaching everyone in math, and going beyond this should be an option, not a mandate.

Most community college students I tutor are there because they had a pretty garbage life, and more often than not had a pretty garbage school district. Expecting a grown up to learn the math of grades 1-10 in a year and a half is something I have always believed to be ridiculous. It can be done, but more often than not it just doesn't happen. I believe for the community college program in this country to succeed in helping more students get out of poverty we at the very least need to rethink how we teach math. What I've outlined above is just an idea, I'd love to hear what you guys think, especially those of you who are involved with community colleges yourselves. I think even if you disagree with what I've written, most of you should at least agree that there's a problem.

I dunno, personally I think that it is important to understand basic maths, as it is fulfilling in your everyday life as well as other outlets. I am also a firm believer in exposure to as many forms of knowledge as possible. Education is lacking, especially in communities like mine, so every little bit helps. Whether they want to pursue a Ph.D in astrophysics, or if they're going for an associate in art, it's still important to grasp every source of expertise. If that makes sense.

 

[Joseph M. Zias]

I posted earlier that courses in logical thinking are available that may be substituted for a course in algebra. But let's take the argument of what should be included in a well rounded education. How about requiring a foreign language? How can you fully appreciate another culture without knowing the intricacies of their language? Fortunately for me the requirement to take a foreign language was dropped my freshman year - we could substitute 3 humanities electives. In high school I dated a girl hat helped me get through Spanish - I did the right thing however, I married her (LOL). (yes, we are still married).

Activities such as Model UN, Mock Trials, and Debate can be vehicles to practice logical thought without the use of logic learned in the manipulation of math symbols.

 

[symbolipoint]

I posted earlier that courses in logical thinking are available that may be substituted for a course in algebra. But let's take the argument of what should be included in a well rounded education. How about requiring a foreign language? How can you fully appreciate another culture without knowing the intricacies of their language? Fortunately for me the requirement to take a foreign language was dropped my freshman year - we could substitute 3 humanities electives. In high school I dated a girl hat helped me get through Spanish - I did the right thing however, I married her (LOL). (yes, we are still married).

Activities such as Model UN, Mock Trials, and Debate can be vehicles to practice logical thought without the use of logic learned in the manipulation of math symbols.

Nice try, but Algebra is still significantly different from a foreign language or from humanities that the best way to understand and benefit from Algebra is through some course work on Algebra. The most general idea is to learn properties of numbers, and ways to relate shapes and numbers.

Foreign Languages are valuable as a possible college degree requirement and deserves its own topic. At least there IS some overlap for communication; specifically interpretation and translation. (Note, too, foreign languages often incorporates some of humanities.)

 

[bhobba]

I am still scratching my head about this one.

In the early years of your education, say up to grade 8, but I will accept grade 10, you are exposed to all areas - math (including algebra), Foreign Language, Literature including Shakespeare, history etc etc. But surely this general education has to stop sometime - you must begin specialization at some point. That happens well after you have studied algebra. Because of that why have it in a tertiary stetting - beats me. Have some remedial education if they haven't reached the required standard - but part of your degree - I simply don't get it.

I gave a link to Templestowe College that IMHO does it correctly. You enter HS in grade 7 in Australia. They accelerate you to grade 8 standard at the end of your first year. Most are able to do it in a year, but regardless you must pass it, including algebra, foreign language etc etc before proceeding. It can take two or even three years in some cases. But once its done you enter what they call their flexible leaning environment - you can study anything you like - even English isn't necessary but they encourage the taking of subjects to improve your communication skills - philosophy is popular for that, but you can take other communication subjects like tertiary subjects from the University of Open Learning such as Academic and Professional Communication and Developing Research and Analytical Skills.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Dr. Courtney]

In the early years of your education, say up to grade 8, but I will accept grade 10, you are exposed to all areas - math (including algebra), Foreign Language, Literature including Shakespeare, history etc etc. But surely this general education has to stop sometime - you must begin specialization at some point. That happens well after you have studied algebra. Because of that why have it in a tertiary stetting - beats me. Have some remedial education if they haven't reached the required standard - but part of your degree - I simply don't get it.

My undergrad degree in physics required 131 credit hours. Looking on my transcript shows I have 100 credit hours in STEM disciplines (science, math, and computer science in my case). So my BS degree had a whole lot more specialization (76%) than I had in high school (33% science and math).

But when I look back at my undergraduate coursework, the non-STEM coursework was very important and has often contributed to my career in unexpected ways. No, I've never used that 10 hours of french in speaking, reading, or translating french. But 30 years later, it remains an essential part of my thinking and mental framework: ideas and solutions to problems often come to me in french, because they are easier to express in french than in english. And the same is true of computer programming. Even if I don't write a program to solve a problem, the solution is formulated in my mind as a computed program. So computer languages and foreign languages are valuable for me even outside of their expected uses, because they trained my mind to think and solve problems in ways I might not otherwise.

At the time I didn't like my required english courses beyond college composition. But since I didn't read most of what I was supposed to in high school, they did provide an important breadth of experience through life. Of course, the college composition courses are also very important for STEM majors. The 12 hours of philosphy were also very important to my development as a scientist and an educator - to see how science fits into other areas of knowledge and human endeavor and to know how to easily explain the common and different features of the scientific method from other epistemologies.

In the same way I appreciate the wisdom of my STEM degree requiring 30 or so hours in non-STEM courses, I also see the wisdom of most BS degrees in non-STEM disciplines requiring 1-2 semester long math courses (usually College Algebra and/or Stats) and 1-2 year long science sequences. A certain amount of science and math (< 15% of the total required credits) both allows for plenty of specialization AND also strengthens the thinking and problem solving of graduates in non-STEM disciplines. Yes, one can always get up on the high horse and say, "They should have completed real mastery of that in high school." But the fact is many do not. My exposure to literature, foreign language, philosophy, was inadequate in high school. Likewise for many in math and science. Circling back around gives another opportunity to strengthen the mind in weak areas.

 

[bhobba]

But when I look back at my undergraduate coursework, the non-STEM coursework was very important and has often contributed to my career in unexpected ways.

But exactly who decides those extra subjects?

Seriously - we have people pushing math, others pushing a foreign language (hell one guy here on TV said you must do a foreign language at uni - its essential - I would have failed yet I was otherwise a straight honor student - is that fair?). With all these competing views and requirements exactly how do you choose? Me I did 100% math and computer science with a couple of exceptions - professional communication A and B plus some humanities subjects were recommended but not compulsory. For the humanities I did mathematical economics - you were supposed to have done macro and micro economics but my lecturer excused me providing I did some reading over the break which I did. But people hated it - even the professional communication - so they got rid of even that. Now IMHO getting rid of communication is woeful and they should not have succumbed to student pressure - it was not the only pressure they succumbed to - that got rid of analysis (ie your epsilonics) for a math degree which IMHO was hopeless. But only nut cases like me liked it - so out it went.

There is no easy choices here - and really while I am unhappy about the compulsory subjects they got rid of is it my place to make such decisions? Whose place is it? Leaving it up to students seems quite reasonable to me.

I think Brown over there in the US is similar - they let you take anything - they call it putting the liberal in liberal arts - but you, correctly IMHO, must take some subjects to develop your communication ability - but that's it.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Dr. Courtney]

But exactly who decides those extra subjects?

Seriously - we have people pushing math, others pushing a foreign language (hell one guy here on TV said you must do a foreign language at uni - its essential - I would have failed yet I was otherwise a straight honor student - is that fair?).

With all these competing views and requirements exactly how do you choose? Me I did 100% math and computer science with a couple of exceptions - professional communication A and B plus some humanities subjects were recommended but not compulsory.

I tend to trust the free market - each institution can choose through their normal decision making process where various stakeholders have a voice. For public schools where the state legislature is the main source of funding, the legislature is definitely going to have a say. Accreditation and certification agencies will also have a say. But there is no need for one centralized authority to dictate all the details.

I bet most STEM majors who have a problem with foreign languages can find some choices that don't require foreign languages.

There is no easy choices here - and really while I am unhappy about the compulsory subjects they got rid of is it my place to make such decisions? Whose place is it? Leaving it up to students seems quite reasonable to me.

I think Brown over there in the US is similar - they let you take anything - they call it putting the liberal in liberal arts - but you, correctly IMHO, must take some subjects to develop your communication ability - but that's it.

Thanks
Bill

So students who want the level of freedom allowed to Brown students are welcome to go to Brown. But not every institution can offer that much freedom and manage an Ivy-league reputation. In the long run, a school's reputation depends on the actual quality of their graduates when they enter the workforce or go on to the next school. (On Physics Forums, we often picture that as graduate school, but in the case of community colleges, it is often transferring to another CC or a 4 year school for a BS degree.)

When I was 17-21, I lacked the wisdom and foresight to see the benefits of the english, philosophy, foreign language, and other humanities courses outside of my STEM major. My observation of most undergraduates is similar. Left to their own devices, they will see out and take the path of least resistance, because they wrongly see the value in the diploma rather than in the real knowledge, skills, abilities, and stronger mind gained in the process.

Over the past 5 years, I've worked with my own teenage children and other students we mentor on the college selection process. Usually there are three broad classes of schools to choose from

1) The top tech schools in the SE US (think GA Tech and VA Tech)

2) Second tier state schools that are strong in STEM but stronger in humanities and that require all the usual humanities breadth (2-3 Foreign language courses, lots of other humanities credits, etc.) - they also make their humanities majors take math and science (think UT-Austin, UVA, and UGA

3) The most conservative private religious schools - some even have fairly good STEM majors (think Liberty U, Hillsdale, Grove City, Bob Jones). We're a conservative faith-based family and a lot of the science projects I mentor are with students from similar families.

For most students, my strongest recommendation is for the state schools that are strong in STEM but stronger in humanities. Here's why: by the time they graduate from high school, most of these students have already gotten enough exposure and training relating to their parents' faith and will likely continue to gain exposure and knowledge through weekly attendance to their church, synagogue, etc. They need broader perspectives more than 15-20 hours a week of uniform viewpoints at the most conservative religious schools. But the (nearly) all STEM all the time from the tech schools also produces a uniformity of viewpoint that is counterproductive to real leadership and vision in their adult careers. In my view, grad school is the place for that level of focus. The 17-21 year old mind is still growing and needs a lot of room to think and explore in a broad array of areas that are not obviously applicable. We want strong, well-informed thinkers who have a broad knowledge in a wide array of academic disciplines - not robotic automatons who grind the desired inputs into the desired outputs.

 

[bhobba]

I tend to trust the free market - each institution can choose through their normal decision making process where various stakeholders have a voice. For public schools where the state legislature is the main source of funding, the legislature is definitely going to have a say.

That I think is the real answer. Most schools here are public with a few private ones here and there. Even public ones have different policies - choose the one that suits you. For example the University of Queensland basically demands English to grade 12 for entry (or equivalent eg some communication subjects at uni), but the Australian National University couldn't care less. My alma mater, they have this idea of presumed knowledge. Providing you can get in what you studied previously is irrelevant. If you pick say a math degree and you didn't do advanced math they have some remedial classes - more work for you - but you are supposed to be an adult by that stage. Strange isn't it. My old alma mater also touts if you are math oriented you can do an entire math degree if you like - other public schools did not follow suit. There is tons of choice out there - you can make up your own mind. And as was the case with mathematical economics for me if you are a good student they clear the way for you - I did some masters level subjects undergrad - the lecturer said fine. BTW those subjects had the prize sum of 3 students - mathematical economics - I was the only student. He would not have let it go ahead with just one student, but being a good student all we did was once a week I went to his room and discussed the reading he gave me - I also worked on an economic simulation program which was interesting. I wrote it in Pascal - but my CS professors said I was crazy - do it in Simula - but my lecturer didn't know Simula, but knew Pascal.

Thanks
Bill

 

[russ_watters]

Professional communication was nothing like English in grade 11 and 12. You actually did useful things like writing a research paper, reading sources such as the Wall St Journal and discussing it, giving presentations - things you do in day to day professional life and as a citizen.

Next to typing, my most valuable communication class was titled "Wind Tunnel". Yeah, you read that right: it was a 2 credit sophomore lab class where we did a basic wind tunnel experiment and then wrote a professional report about it. The professor didn't so much teach the writing part as he did just rip all our lab reports to shreds until we learned from all the red what they really should look like. Regardless of the subject behind it though, professional writing is definitely a critical skill for professional people. And included as part of virtually any professional writing are algebra (at least Algebra 1) and Excel.

 

[russ_watters]

One of my former colleagues would always bring this point up in discussions about STEM education. She would note how people are considered educated if they know about literature, history, art, and so on even if they are woefully ignorant of science and math. But if you turn that around, a scientist or mathematician who's not well versed in the humanities isn't considered educated so much; rather, he or she is just a nerd. Given this common attitude, it's not surprising that math gets the short end of the stick in K-12 education in the US.

I think this double standard is recognized and gets talked about a lot by STEM faculty, but it's hard and nearly impossible to overcome the biases held by the general public.

I'm trying to decide if this should bother me or please me.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Hillsdale

Is Hillsdale religious? It's certainly conservative,

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Is Hillsdale religious? It's certainly conservative,

Hillsdale goes on and on about the US Constitution. I would bet they probably think their own is important also:

Article 6
Religious culture in particular shall be conserved by the College, and by the selection of instructors and other practicable expedients, it shall be a conspicuous aim to teach by precept and example the essentials of the Christian faith and religion.

See: https://www.hillsdale.edu/about/history/founding-documents/

 

[Mark44]

One of my former colleagues would always bring this point up in discussions about STEM education. She would note how people are considered educated if they know about literature, history, art, and so on even if they are woefully ignorant of science and math. But if you turn that around, a scientist or mathematician who's not well versed in the humanities isn't considered educated so much; rather, he or she is just a nerd.

John Allen Paulos brings this up in his book "Innumeracy," that at dinner parties, many who were considered "intellectuals" had little or no knowledge of mathematics or the sciences more current than about the 17th century. On the other hand, as anecdotal evidence, many of the people who were my instructors in mathematics or the sciences (principally physics) or were my peers when I was teaching were quite knowledgeable in literature and the arts. My hiking buddy, who was a fellow math instructor at a community college, is a frequent chorus member in the Seattle Opera and other local opera companies.

 

[symbolipoint]

This is great, from Dr. Courtney:

So computer languages and foreign languages are valuable for me even outside of their expected uses, because they trained my mind to think and solve problems in ways I might not otherwise.

 

[bhobba]

I'm trying to decide if this should bother me or please me.

There is the converse.

Some University of Queensland students broke into the toilets generally used by students doing Bachelor of Arts degrees (equivalent to your liberal arts degrees) and wrote on the sheets of toilet paper - BA - take one.

There was no outrage, just a bit of a snicker - they knew it had a ring of truth despite calling the STEM students nerds and what not. They know it's harder and is reflected by the better salaries they usually get. I put up with it whenever I told anyone what I was studying - a bit of a snicker and knowing look (your obviously a nerd) but would say - God you must be smart - I had to explain left-right brain stuff and the work you must do - it not a matter of being 'smart' - many humanities students are smart - its simply a matter of your makeup and knuckling down.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

This is great, from Dr. Courtney:

Yes its true - trouble is some students find at least one of those really HARD. My ability to learn foreign languages is woeful. Despite tuition I got a 3 on a 1-7 scale in grade 10 German. Not that I did work - it simply turned me off - my Tutor made all sorts of snide comments about my maturity - which was low for my age (14) but to be honest even if I really worked hard I doubt I would have done much better. Yes all should be exposed to it, and it is of value, but any further study for me would have been - well useless.

Of course computer programming came easy to me, but there were those, even a few math students believe it or not, that found it hard like I did foreign languages. It was useless getting them to take more advanced classes - the same as me doing foreign languages.

My English ability was nearly as bad as my Foreign Langauge ability - but later came to see the vital importance of the ability to communicate well - more important than foreign languages or computer programming.

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

Hillsdale goes on and on about the US Constitution.

Even out here in Aus that's what I have gleaned about that school rather than being really religious. Everyone thinks Thomas Aquinas college is really religious as well but its more about Socratic discussion of great books than actual religion.

Here in Aus catholic HS's only have about 50% of students that are Catholic and many are not even religious. But they have two great virtues - for private schools they are really cheap ($2k a year or even less is common - but the elite ones cost quite a bit more) and impose strict discipline - no bullying etc etc - they clamp down on it big time.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Even out here in Aus that's what I have gleaned about that school rather than being really religious. Everyone thinks Thomas Aquinas college is really religious as well but its more about Socratic discussion of great books than actual religion.

Circling back to the original discussion, I will note that even a liberal arts school like Hillsdale College requires one semester each of Math, Chemistry, Physics, and Biology of all their majors, even the humanities. Their view of education has these course requirements even for majors in: French, German, Politics, Art, Greek, Psychology, History, Religion, Latin, Marketing, Music, Theater, Physical Education, and Philosophy.

 

[symbolipoint]

Circling back to the original discussion, I will note that even a liberal arts school like Hillsdale College requires one semester each of Math, Chemistry, Physics, and Biology of all their majors, even the humanities. Their view of education has these course requirements even for majors in: French, German, Politics, Art, Greek, Psychology, History, Religion, Latin, Marketing, Music, Theater, Physical Education, and Philosophy.

That goes along the meaning of Liberal Arts. Students are to study and learn about a large variety of subjects.

 

[PhotonSSBM]

I've been thinking a lot over the last few weeks about this without posting. The main reason I posted was to be challenged, and maybe garner some ideas from all of you.

I believe I'm more on the other side now in the following way:

Community Colleges changing their curriculum, while pragmatic in a way, does not solve the underlying problem. Instead, it is an admission of guilt that high schools are poorly managed and an attempt to circumvent fixing that by simply wiping the slate clean once the student reaches them, and saying, "Don't worry, you don't have to deal with this. It's too hard for you anyway."

This hit me when Dr. Courtney mentioned his experience as a professor that echoed mine as a tutor that all students who I've ever seen apply themselves to algebra have at least passed the class. I've been far removed from community college for a year and a half, so that fact hadn't been at the front of my mind when I made the thread. But it does tell the real story of what's going on. Community colleges, like high schools, have made the decision that it's too hard to teach well and meaningfully. This change in California is no different from teachers who pass their students falsely for the sake of their paycheck.

I believe ultimately we may very well change the way we teach math as a general education requirement and as a basic skill, but that won't fix this problem (a point that I missed for all my previous posts). The problem is that students are being taught in high school that they aren't worth teaching. And now these students are being told when they get to community college that they're too dumb to do the work. Even if we taught something like combinatorics or statistics in place of algebra these students will likely still do poorly if the school was already unsuccessful at teaching them Algebra.

Sorry to waste everyone's' time.